Weekly Report - Refusal Reason Page 74

8/3/2019 Weekly Report - Refusal Reason Page 74

1/96

PLANNING SERVICES

WEEKLY REPORT

No. 1484

Week ending 15th April 2011

The attached Weekly Report incorporates the following sections:

CONTENTS PAGE

SECTION 1

Reports on applications

SECTION 2

Reports on enforcement cases

SECTION 3

List of applications referred from Weekly Report No. 1482

SECTION 4

List of minor amendments to plans approved under delegated powersSECTION 5

List of appeals received

SECTION 6

Reports on appeal decisions received

SECTION 7

List of enforcement complaints where possible breach of planning control has beenidentified

SECTION 8

List of enforcement complaints where NO breach of planning control has beenidentified OR where any breach of planning control has ceased or been remedied


2/96

1484/2 15 2011

CONTENTS PAGE

SECTION 1 - REPORTS ON APPLICATIONS

Reference Address Ward Parish Page

BRW/123/2011 96 KNIGHTS WAYBRENTWOOD

BRENTWOODSOUTH

9

BRW/130/2011 106AHIGH STREETBRENTWOOD

BRENTWOODSOUTH

10

BRW/133/2011 92 BILLERICAY

ROADHERONGATEBRENTWOOD

HERONGATE,

INGRAVE & WESTHORNDON

14

BRW/137/2011 LAND REAR OF 4LODGE CLOSEHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON EAST 16

BRW/138/2011 7 CLOCK TOWERTHE GALLERIESWARLEY

BRENTWOOD

WARLEY 19

LB/BRW/4/2011 7 CLOCK TOWERTHE GALLERIESWARLEYBRENTWOOD

WARLEY 21

BRW/139/2011 1 CHELMER DRIVEHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON EAST 23

BRW/141/2011 FARRIERSTHE ALLEYBLACKMOREINGATESTONEBRENTWOOD

TIPPS CROSS Blackmore,Hook End &Wyatts GreenParish Council

27

BRW/144/2011 19 SUNRAYAVENUEHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON EAST 30


3/96

1484/3 15 2011

BRW/148/2011 40 KINGGEORGES ROADPILGRIMS HATCHBRENTWOOD

PILGRIMS HATCH 32

BRW/150/2011 46B CROSSWAYSSHENFIELDBRENTWOOD

SHENFIELD 38

BRW/151/2011 GRAYLINGSCOTTAGEHORSEMAN SIDENAVESTOCKSIDEBRENTWOOD

BRIZES ANDDODDINGHURST

NavestockParish Council

41

BRW/154/2011 8 HOLDENGARDENSWARLEYBRENTWOOD

WARLEY 43

BRW/155/2011 CARINTHIAWYATTS GREENROADWYATTS GREENBRENTWOOD

TIPPS CROSS Blackmore,Hook End &Wyatts GreenParish Council

46

BRW/156/2011 27 COTSWOLD

GARDENSHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON EAST 48

BRW/162/2011 7 CLAVERINGGARDENSWEST HORNDONBRENTWOOD

HERONGATE,INGRAVE & WESTHORNDON

West HorndonParish Council

51

BRW/165/2011 36 LONG MEADOWHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON CENTRAL 53

BRW/167/2011 13 PRIESTS LANEBRENTWOOD

BRENTWOODSOUTH

55

BRW/168/2011 9 HAYWARDSCLOSEHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON EAST 57


4/96

1484/4 15 2011

BRW/169/2011 17 SURMANCRESCENTHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON CENTRAL 59

BRW/170/2011 3A ST. JOHNSAVENUEWARLEYBRENTWOOD

WARLEY 60

BRW/171/2011 CHAIN BRIDGEFARMROMAN ROADSHENFIELDBRENTWOOD

SHENFIELD 62

BRW/173/2011 10 CARPENTERPATHHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON NORTH 65

BRW/174/2011 TREVERVOEBROCKLEYGROVEHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON SOUTH 66

BRW/175/2011 4 INGRAVE ROADBRENTWOOD

BRENTWOODSOUTH

69

BRW/186/2011 8 WALTHAMCLOSEHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTON NORTH 71

BRW/83/2011 FAIRHOLMEHIGHLANDAVENUEBRENTWOOD

BRENTWOODNORTH

73

EXT/BRW/7/2011 11 STUART CLOSEPILGRIMS HATCHBRENTWOOD

PILGRIMS HATCH 83

LB/BRW/6/2011 NAVESTOCKWOODHOUSEDUDBROOK ROADKELVEDONCOMMONBRENTWOOD

BRIZES ANDDODDINGHURST

NavestockParish Council

85


5/96

1484/5 15 2011

LB/BRW/7/2011 THE BOARS HEAD15 BILLERICAYROADHERONGATEBRENTWOOD


Herongate &Ingrave ParishCouncil

87

TPO/BRW/28/2011 11 THE DELLGREAT WARLEYBRENTWOOD

WARLEY 89

SECTION 2 - REPORTS ON ENFORCEMENT CASES

None

SECTION 3 - LIST OF APPLICATIONS REFERRED FROM WEEKLY REPORT NO.1482

Reference Address DevelopmentReferredBy

Page

BRW/790/2010 48-52QUEENSROAD

BRENTWOOD

DEMOLITION OF EXISTINGBUILDINGS ANDCONSTRUCTION OF 10

RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS(TWO FLATS, FIVE DUPLEXESAND THREE TOWN HOUSES)INCLUDING VEHICULARACCESS FROM COPTFOLDROAD AND PARKING SPACES

Cllr Le-Surf

92

BRW/84/2011 THE FORGEGREATWARLEYSTREETWARLEY

BRENTWOOD

CHANGE OF USE, EXTENSIONAND CONVERSION OFEXISTING FORGE BUILDING TORESIDENTIAL DWELLNG ANDERECTION OF 6 NEW

DWELLINGS AND ACARTLODGE, NEW ACCESS,PARKING AND LANDSCAPING

Cllr MrsPound

92

CAC/BRW/1/2011 THE FORGEGREATWARLEYSTREETWARLEYBRENTWOOD

DEMOLITION OF WORKSHOPBUILDINGS

Cllr MrsPound

92


6/96

1484/6 15 2011

SECTION 4 - LIST OF MINOR AMENDMENTS TO PLANS APPROVED UNDERDELEGATED POWERS

None

SECTION 5 - NOTIFICATION OF THE FOLLOWING APPEALS HAS BEENRECEIVED

None

SECTION 6 - NOTIFICATION OF THE DECISION ON THE FOLLOWING APPEALSHAS BEEN RECEIVED

Reference Address Development Page

ENF/BRW/268/2009 HOLMFIELD BROOKLANEDODDINGHURSTBRENTWOOD

OPERATIONAL DEVELOPMENTCOMPRISING THECONSTRUCTION OF ADETACHED BARN BUILDING FORUSE AS AN INDOOR SWIMMING

POOL, LEISURE FACILITY ANDGYMNASIUM, INCIDENTAL TOTHE RESIDENTIAL USE OF THEMAIN PROPERTY.

93

SECTION 7 - LIST OF ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINTS WHERE POSSIBLE BREACHOF PLANNING CONTROL HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED

None


7/96

1484/7 15 2011

SECTION 8 - LIST OF ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINTS WHERE NO BREACH OFPLANNING CONTROL HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED OR WHERE ANY BREACH OFPLANNING CONTROL HAS CEASED OR BEEN REMEDIED

Reference Address Ward Parish Page

ENF/BRW/141/2007 HALFWAY HOUSEA127 WEST HORNDONBRENTWOOD


WestHorndonParishCouncil

95

ENF/BRW/163/2011 LAND BEHINDSANTANDER BANKCROWN STREETBRENTWOOD

BRENTWOODSOUTH

96

ENF/BRW/342/2010 CROW GREEN FARMDAYS LANE PILGRIMSHATCH BRENTWOOD

PILGRIMS HATCH 96

ENF/BRW/7/2011 59, RAYLEIGH ROADHUTTONBRENTWOOD

HUTTONCENTRAL

96


8/96

1484/8 15 2011

PLANNING SERVICES

REPORTS ON APPLICATIONS

Applications delegated to the Interim Built Environment Manager for decisionsubject to the concurrence of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the PlanningDevelopment Control Committee.

Decision Notices will be issued in accordance with the attachedrecommendations unless an application is referred to the Planning Committee bya MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL for the Ward in which the application is submittedor by the appropriate PARISH COUNCIL.

The referral of applications to the Planning Development Control Committee willbe in accordance with the protocol agreed by the Committee in December 2008and any application that is referred will be reported to the next available meetingof that Committee.

Where a Member for the Ward within which the proposal is located or a ParishCouncil is considering the referral of an application the Member or arepresentative of the Parish Council must speak to the case officer, the PrincipalPlanning Officer or the Interim Built Environment Manager in order to discuss thematter.

Applications may be referred in writing or by E mailing the Planning Department([email protected]) giving a valid Planning Reason for referring theApplication.

Planning Services Administration Support must be notified of any applicationwhich is to be referred by 12 Noon on 25th April 2011. You will receive anacknowledgement 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 otherrepresentations) are available for inspection at the Planning Office.

SECTION 1


9/96

1484/9 15 2011

96 KNIGHTS WAY BRENTWOOD

SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND INCREASE HEIGHT OF EXISTING REAR

EXTENSION.

BRW/123/2011

Ward: BRENTWOOD SOUTH Zoning: Residential

Parish: Policies: CP1

Case Officer: Mandeep Chaggar (Tel:01277 312608)

8/13 Week Date: 22nd April 2011

1. Proposals

Single storey rear extension with a flat roof and three roof lights. Raise roof of existing single storey rear building up to the height of the existing

parapet walls. Demolish outbuilding and shed.

2. Relevant History

BRW/38/88 - Single storey extension and canopy at front. Approved.

3. Consultation Responses

None.

4. Neighbour Responses

None.

5. Summary of Issues

This application relates to a mid-terraced property located in a residential area. The existing shed would be removed and the extension proposed would be the

same depth as the existing as well as no.98 Knights Way's extension. It isconsidered it would not have an unacceptable detrimental affect on the adjoiningoccupiers by way of overbearing or loss of light.

The proposed works would extend the full width of the property, would not extendany deeper than the existing kitchen and no higher than the top of the parapetwall. Although no. 94 has no rear extension along the boundary, taking intoconsideration the existing kitchen extension, it is considered this would not havean unacceptable detrimental affect by way of overbearing or loss of light.

In light of the above, it is considered the proposal would comply with Policy CP1of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan.


10/96

1484/10 15

2011

6. Recommendation

Approve

1) T1 - Standard time

2) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of theextension hereby permitted shall match in colour and texture those used inthe existing building.(Reason: In the interests of amenity.)

3) The plans relevant to this permission are: Drg No. 101 P 2011 01 Rev A,Extra B, Extra A.(Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives

1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development planpolicies relevant to this proposal that are set out below.

2) I11 - Policies related to approval

3) I8 - Accordance with approved plans

106A HIGH STREET BRENTWOOD

CHANGE OF USE FROM A1 TO A3/A4/A5 AND ALTERED REAR BIN ENCLOSURE.

BRW/130/2011

Ward: BRENTWOOD SOUTH Zoning: Residential/Office/Shopping

Parish: Policies: C14 CP1 TC7

Case Officer: Morne Van Rooyen (Tel:01277 312607)

8/13 Week Date: 27th April 2011

1. Proposals

This application is for a change of use from A1(Retail) to A3/A4 and A5. The small second floor would be used as ancillary staff accommodation. Opening hours for the proposed use would be Monday to Sunday 07:30 to 02:00.

2. Relevant History

None directly relevant to the application site, but it is worth noting that theadjacent unit at 106 High Street was granted planning permission for a change ofuse from A2 to A5 in January 2011.


11/96

1484/11 15

2011


Highways: No comment at time of report Environmental health: No objection subject to suitable conditions


None


The application site is a unit located at the southern end of Brentwood HighStreet within a conservation area. The unit is currently vacant, but has a lawful A1

retail use. Policy TC7 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan aims to ensure a wide

range of shopping opportunities within the town centre, dispersal of non retailuses and integration of nonretail uses, in order to protect the vitality of the towncentre and the viability of retail uses.

In order to achieve this, policy TC7 restricts the number of nonretail usespermitted within the different blocks to no more than 40% and the number ofnonretail uses in a row to no more than two adjacent nonretail uses.

The change of use to 106A High Street would result in more than two adjacentnonretail uses, as the unit at 106 High Street was granted planning permissionfor A5 use while the unit at 108 High Street is trading as a lawful A3/A5 use.

In addition it is noted that the established situation is that 46% of the properties

within the block 56 to 114 High Street are non-retail and an additional no-retailunit as proposed would increase this percentage.

For the above reasons it is considered that the proposed change of use would becontrary to Policy TC7.

In support of the application the applicants have indicated in their design andaccess statement that this double unit has been vacant for over two years and islocated in a part of the High Street associated with non-retail which reduces theprospect of a retailer occupying the unit.

It is further suggested that a vacant unit of this size unacceptably detracts fromthe character and appearance of the streetscene and the Conservation Area.

Comment: Whilst this double unit is located within the Brentwood Town Centre it

falls outside of the area identified as Prime Shopping Frontage which lies furtherto the North. This part of High Street has a relatively high proportion of non A1retail uses and performs an important function as part of the leisure offer withinthe town centre. It is considered that the size of the unit would result in it beingless attractive for small retail uses and whilst the proposed use would not result inA1 floorspace it would boost the number of people visiting this part of the HighStreet.


12/96

1484/12 15

2011

Overall the town centre remains reasonably buoyant in the current difficult tradingconditions. However this vacant unit detracts from this part of the High Streetand whilst the proposal would be contrary to Policy TC7 it is considered that the

active use of these premises would enhance the commercial character of thearea and contribute to the vitality and viability of the town centre as a whole.

Neighbouring amenity The proposed A3/A4 and A5 use is generally associated with late night activity as

well as noise and disturbance from clientele, deliveries and refuse disposal.There are flats to the rear of the application site and any application for change ofuse should consider the amenity of the occupiers of the flats. In this regard it isconsidered that the general activity generated by the proposed use would beconcentrated in the High Street while the proposed opening hours would besimilar to those hours of similar use in the immediate vicinity. The opening hoursof the premises will be controlled through the licensing process.

In addition the submitted plans indicate that a new refuse area would beconstructed with internal access from the main building hereby reducing generalactivity to the rear of the site.

For the above reasons it is considered that the proposed change of use would notresult in an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance and would not detractfrom the amenities of the occupiers of the flats.

ConclusionWhilst the proposed change of use would be contrary to Policy TC7 it isconsidered that the matters raised by the applicants are of sufficient weight toovercome the policy objection to the proposal whilst resulting in a developmentthat would be likely to maintain the character and appearance of the

Conservation Area and be compliant with the general aims and objectives of theLocal Plan.

In addition the proposed change of use would not detract from the amenities ofthe occupiers of the flats to the rear of the application site compliant with PolicyCP1.

6. Recommendation

Approve


2) The rating level of the noise emitted from the extractor ventilation unit shall belower than the background level by at least 5dB when measured from thenearest residential property. The measurements and assessment shall bemade according to BS4142:1990.(Reason: To ensure that disturbance by way of excessive noise does notoccur, in the interest of the amenities of nearby occupiers.)


13/96

1484/13 15

2011

3) Notwithstanding the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 or the Town andCountry Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or anysubsequent re-enacting Acts or Orders) no floodlighting or any other form ofexternal lighting shall be provided on the site.(Reason: To safeguard the living conditions of nearby residents and tosafeguard the character and appearance of the area )

4) The use hereby permitted shall not commence until the facilities to beprovided for the storage of refuse have been provided in accordance with thedetails shown on the approved drawings. Thereafter the use shall not be shallnot continue unless those facilities are retained.(Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made in order to safeguardthe character and appearance of the area.)

5) Prior to the commencement of the use hereby permitted, a grease trap shall

be installed to the foul drainage system in accordance with details to beagreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and shall thereafter bepermanently retained in the agreed form and maintained in accordance withthe manufacturer's specifications.(Reason: In the interests of amenity and public health.)

6) Unless formally permitted by the local planning authority the developmenthereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance withthe approved drawings numbered 11-011/01 and 11-011/02 andspecifications.(Reason: To ensure that the development is as permitted by the localplanning authority and for the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives

1) Reason for approval:- The proposal would not accord with Policy TC7 of theBrentwood Replacement Local Plan; however having had regard to allmaterial considerations it is considered that the benefit arising from theproposed change of use would outweigh the Policy harm identified.




14/96

1484/14 15

2011

92 BILLERICAY ROAD HERONGATE BRENTWOOD

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING HOUSE AND GARAGE AND ERECTION OF SINGLE

STOREY DWELLING AND ASSOCIATED GARAGE.

BRW/133/2011

Ward: HERONGATE, INGRAVE& WEST HORNDON

Zoning: Metropolitan Green Belt

Parish: Policies: CP1 GB1 GB2 GB6



1. Proposals

Demolition of existing house and garage. Erection of single storey dwelling and associated garage and carport linked to the

dwelling.

2. Relevant History

BRE/13/72 - Extension and alterations. Refused. BRE/196/72 - Extensions and alterations. Refused. S192/BRW/104/2010 - Certificate of lawfulness for a proposed use: Single storey

side and rear extensions. Approved 14/01/11.


Highways: would not wish to raise an objection to this application given theexisting dwelling and its accesses and the area to be available for parking withinthe site, will comply with the Brentwood Borough Council adopted parkingstandards, for the proposed dwelling.

Herongate and Ingrave Parish Council: No objection.


None.


The application lies within a large site within the Metropolitan Green Belt and assuch PPG2 and Local Plan Policies GB1, GB2, and GB6 are relevant.


15/96

1484/15 15

2011

This proposal is for the demolition of a bungalow and the erection of a new singlestorey dwellinghouse. The proposed dwelling would be approximately 1.6mhigher than the existing dwelling and would not be situated any closer to the

highway. Planning Policy Guidance note 2 states that the replacement of existing dwellings

need not be inappropriate, provided the new dwelling is not materially larger thanthe dwelling it replaces. The new dwelling would be higher, wider and more bulkythan the existing and would result in an approximate doubling of the habitablefloorspace. As the proposed dwelling would be materially larger than the existingdwelling it replaces it would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt,contrary to Policy GB6 and PPG2.

Local Plan Policy GB2 states that when considering proposals for developmentwithin the Green Belt, the Local Planning Authority will need to be satisfied thatthey do not harm the openness of the Green Belt. The width of the dwelling would

be much greater than the existing dwelling and the dwelling would be higher. Thiswould detract from the openness of the countryside as the overall visual masswould be greater than that of the original dwelling, contrary to Policy GB2. Theproposal would also conflict with policy CP1.

A certificate of lawful use was submitted and approved for rear and sideextensions, showing approximately 72.5sq.m of additional floorspace could becreated without the need for planning permission. The applicant indicates that thismatter should be taken into account in the determination of this application andargues that the "permitted development" additions would be unattractive andthermally inefficient. Whilst these comments are noted it is considered that theproposal would have a significantly greater effect on the green belt countryside

and that the potential for "PD" extensions to the existing dwelling does not clearlyoutweigh the harm due to inappropriateness and the other harm identified.

It is therefore considered that the "very special circumstances" needed to justifyinappropriate development in the green belt do not exist.

6. Recommendation

Refuse

1) Policy GB1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan as well as PPG2provides that planning permission will not be given, except in very special

circumstances, for the construction of new buildings other than for those usesappropriate to the Green Belt. The proposed replacement dwelling would bematerially larger than the original dwelling and are as such would representinappropriate development. The proposal would therefore conflict with PolicyGB1 of the Local Plan as well as with PPG2.

2) The proposal would detract from the openness of the Metropolitan Green Beltand would be harmful to the character and appearance of the countryside andwould conflict with policies GB2, GB5, GB6 and CP1 of the BrentwoodReplacement Local Plan.


16/96

1484/16 15

2011

3) No very special circumstances have been advanced that are of sufficientweight to clearly outweigh the harm due to inappropriateness and the otherharm arising from the proposal contrary to PPG2.

Informatives

1) I12 - Policies related to refusal

LAND REAR OF 4 LODGE CLOSE HUTTON BRENTWOOD

CONTINUATION OF USE OF LAND AS RESIDENTIAL GARDEN.

BRW/137/2011

Ward: HUTTON EAST Zoning: ResidentialMetropolitan Green Belt

Parish: Policies: CP1 GB1 GB8



1. Proposals

This is a retrospective application for the retention of the 700sq.m piece of land tothe rear of 4 Lodge Close as a domestic garden. No part of the 700sq.m piece of land at any time formed part of the residential

curtilage of the property. All of the land lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt.

2. Relevant History

ENF/BRW/232/2003 - Use of the land has changed to domestic garden.


None


One letter of objection has been received and the matters raised can besummarised as follows:

1) Continued use of the land would detract from the character andappearance of the Green Belt in this location.

2) Use of the land as garden area is against planning policy.3) If permission was granted it would set a precedent.


17/96

1484/17 15

2011


The site lies within the country side and also forms part of the Metropolitan Green

Belt and as such PPG2 and Local Plan Policies GB1 and GB8 are relevant. Whether the proposed development would be inappropriate within the Green Belt

National policy on Green Belts is set out in PPG2. Paragraph 1.5 of PPG2indicates that one of the purposes of including land in the Green Belts is to assistin the safeguarding of the countryside from encroachment. PPG2 indicates thatthere is a presumption against inappropriate development in Green Belts and thatvery special circumstances to justify inappropriate development will not existunless the harm by reason of inappropriateness and any other harm is clearlyoutweighed by other considerations.

PPG2 indicates that unless they maintain openness and do not conflict with thepurposes of including land in the Green Belt material changes of use of land are

inappropriate. Paragraph 7.35 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan 2005 states that the

extension of domestic curtilages into the Green Belt leads to further urbanisationthrough the construction of hard standings, walls, sheds, etc as well as increasedgeneral activity and a change from rural to suburban character which are contraryto the aims of the Green Belt. Policy GB8 (Extensions to Gardens) states:Applications to allow extensions of a domestic curtilage into the Green Belt willnot be allowed.

It is considered that in this instance a material change of use has occurred. Thatchange, from agricultural land to an extended domestic curtilage represents anencroachment of the residential character of the gardens into the countryside

which conflicts with one of the reasons for including land in Green Belts. For thatreason the development that has occurred is inappropriate as defined by PPG2and is also directly in conflict with Policy GB8.

PPG2 indicates that inappropriate development should not be permitted in GreenBelts unless the harm due to inappropriateness and any other harm is clearlyoutweighed by other matters.

The applicants have submitted a planning statement through their agent in whichthe following matters in support of the application are raised:

- The land was sold by the Chelmsford Diocesan Board of Finance.- Council failed to take action in terms of breaches that occurred between

2003 and 2005.

- Property with land to the rear was bought by Mr. Bozza in 2006.- No structures have been erected on the land, while no other form of

landscaping treatment has taken place.- The current situation has continued unchallenged for 9 years


18/96

1484/18 15

2011

Comments The enforcement history for this site shows that officers have metthe current owners as well as previous owners of the land at various timesbetween 2003 and 2010 and in addition have been in correspondence with them.

This correspondence appears to indicate that there may have been a breach ofplanning control and suggests that planning permission would be required toregularise the current situation. No other matters have been raised by theowners of the land that outweigh the harm identified. Very special circumstancesdo not exist and there would be no justification for the granting of planningpermission.

Conclusion:On the basis of the information in the officers report it is considered that thecontinued use of the land would represent encroachment of the residentialcharacter of the garden into the countryside and would for this reason fail tocomply with PPG2 and Local Plan Policy GB8.

6. Recommendation

Refuse

1) The site lies outside the areas allocated for development in the AdoptedBrentwood Local Plan and, furthermore, forms part of the Metropolitan GreenBelt. The Adopted Replacement Brentwood Local Plan indicates, interalia,that in order to achieve the objectives of the Green Belt, planning permissionwill not be given, except in very special circumstances, for development forpurposes other than those appropriate to a Green Belt. The continued use of

the land would result in the extension of the domestic curtilage whichrepresents encroachment of the residential character of the gardens into thecountryside which conflicts with one of the reasons for including land in GreenBelts. For this reason the development represents inappropriate developmentas defined by PPG2 and there are no very special circumstances in this caseto warrant a departure from Policy GB8 of the Brentwood Replacement LocalPlan.

Informatives



19/96

1484/19 15

2011

7 CLOCK TOWER THE GALLERIES WARLEY BRENTWOOD

CHANGE OF USE FROM OFFICE TO RESIDENTIAL

BRW/138/2011

Ward: WARLEY Zoning: Major Housing Site

Parish: Policies: C15 CP1



1. Proposals

The application seeks planning permission for the conversion of the existingground floor office area into a study, shower room and incorporating these intothe current residential unit at this Grade II Listed Building.

2. Relevant History

Whilst the greater Warley Hospital site has an extensive planning history there isno planning history directly relevant to this particular application site.LB/BRW/4/2011: Internal alterations to allow existing ground floor office to beconverted to a study, shower room and to be incorporated into the residential unit

- Recommended for approval elsewhere on this list


Highways: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to theabove application given the scale of the proposal, the location, the existence ofthe office and Brentwood Borough Councils adopted parking standards

Essex County Council Historic Planner: Has no objection to this application


None


The Clock Tower forms part of the greater Warley Hospital development which isa Grade II Listed Building.

The works that are proposed would serve to convert the exiting ground floor officearea to a study and a shower room and to incorporate it into the existingresidential unit.


20/96

1484/20 15

2011

Having regard to the comments from the Historic Buildings Advisor in combinationwith the fact that the works would all be internal it is considered that the proposedworks would not detract from the character and appearance of the Listed Building

and would be compliant with Policy C15 of the Brentwood Replacement LocalPlan.

For the reasons set out above it is considered that the proposed works wouldcomply with Policy CP1 and C15 of the Local Plan.

6. Recommendation

Approve

1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration ofthree years from the date of this permission(Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory PurchaseAct 2004.)

2) Unless formally permitted by the local planning authority the developmenthereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance withthe approved drawing numbered 62811.01 and specifications.(Reason: To ensure that the development is as permitted by the localplanning authority and for the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives

1) Reason for approval:- The proposal would accord with the development planpolicies relevant to this proposal that are set out below.




21/96

1484/21 15

2011

7 CLOCK TOWER THE GALLERIES WARLEY BRENTWOOD

INTERNAL ALTERATIONS TO FACILITATE CHANGE OF USE FROM OFFICE TORESIDENTIAL

LB/BRW/4/2011

Ward: WARLEY Zoning: Major Housing Site

Parish: Policies: C15



1. Proposals

The application seeks listed building consent for the conversion of the existingground floor office area into a study, shower room and incorporating these intothe current residential unit at this Grade II Listed Building.

2. Relevant History

Whilst the greater Warley Hospital site has an extensive planning history there isno planning history directly relevant to this particular application site.BRW/138/2011: Change of use from office to residential - Recommended for

approval elsewhere on this list


Highways: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to theabove application given the scale of the proposal, the location, the existence ofthe office and Brentwood Borough Councils adopted parking standards

Essex County Council Historic Planner: Has no objection to this application


None


The Clock Tower forms part of the greater Warley Hospital development which isa Grade II Listed Building.

The works that are proposed would serve to convert the exiting ground floor officearea to a study and a shower room and to incorporate it into the existingresidential unit.


22/96

1484/22 15

2011

Having regard to the comments from the Historic Buildings Advisor in combinationwith the fact that the works would all be internal it is considered that the proposedworks would not detract from the character and appearance of the Listed Building

and would be compliant with Policy C15 of the Brentwood Replacement LocalPlan.

6. Recommendation

Approve

1) The works hereby granted consent shall be begun on or before the expirationof three years from the date of this permission(Reason: To comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings andConservation Areas) Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planningand Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 )

2) The works hereby granted consent shall (unless any other condition attachedto this consent requires otherwise) be carried out, and thereafter permanentlybe retained in strict accordance with the description of works and with thedetails indicated on the plans returned herewith, without any amendments,additions or variations whatsoever.(Reason: In the interests of the character and integrity of this listed building.)

3) The materials to be used during the internal conversion of the building herebypermitted shall match those used in the existing building.(Reason: In the interest of the character and integrity of the listed building.)

4) Unless formally permitted by the local planning authority the developmenthereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance withthe approved drawing(s) numbered 62811.01 and specifications.(Reason: To ensure that the development is as permitted by the localplanning authority and for the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives





23/96

1484/23 15

2011

1 CHELMER DRIVE HUTTON BRENTWOOD

ERECTION OF TWO NEW DWELLINGS

BRW/139/2011

Ward: HUTTON EAST Zoning: Residential

Parish: Policies: CP1 H14 T2



1. Proposals

Erection of a pair of terraced 2 bedroom properties attached to existing terracedproperty, each with a single parking space access from Chelmer Drive.

1 Property measuring 4.3m wide x 10.2m deep x 7.2m high (max dimensions)and the second property 4.3m wide x 9.4m deep x 7.2m high (max dimensions).The extensions are to be finished with a hipped roof and would in addition resultin the creation of a double gable to the rear of the property.

Erection of front extension to existing dwelling to form new front door measuring4.25m wide x 1m deep x 3.1m high with mono pitch roof.

The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement whichcomments:

o the area of the proposed site for the new dwellings is 400sqm.o the private amenity spaces will be 75sq.m and 100sq.m respectively, 1Chelmer Drive would retain 95sq.m of private amenity space.o The aspect of 1 Chelmer Drive would be revised to face Fairview Avenue.o The design reflects the style and scale of the adjacent existing house being in aneo-Georgian style.

2. Relevant History

BRW/431/2003 - Retention of two metre high fence at the side. Approved. BRW/204/2008 Erection of 2 No. two bedroom terraced dwellings attached to

existing dwelling and front extension to existing dwelling Refused anddismissed at appeal


24/96

1484/24 15

2011


Highways: The Highway Authority would wish to raise an objection to the aboveapplication for the following reasons:

- The proposed number of parking spaces within the site would not comply withBrentwood Borough Councils adopted parking standards, for the proposed andexisting dwellings. This proposal would therefore be contrary to the aims andobjectives of Policy DM8 of Essex County Councils Development ManagementPolicies.- The width of the parking spaces shown on the drawing submitted with theapplication would not comply with Brentwood Borough Councils adopted parkingstandards. This proposal would therefore be contrary to the aims and objectives

of Policy DM8 of Essex County Councils Development Management Policies.- The lack of inter-visibility between pedestrians in the highway and users of theproposed southern parking space would constitute a danger within the highway,in particular to children on the footway. This proposal would therefore be contraryto highway/pedestrian safety.


One letter of objection was received and the matters raised can be summarisedas follows:

1. Loss of privacy due to rear facing windows

2. Access to the rear of the proposed development raises security concernsas pedestrians would have access to the side of the property at No. 3Chelmer Drive

3. Overdevelopment of the site would detract from the character of the streetscene.

4. Lack of parking provisionA separate matter in relation to covenants was raised, but as this is not a materialplanning consideration.


Principle of developmentPolicy H14 of the Local Plan indicates that residential densities will be expectedto be no less than 30 dwellings per hectare net unless the special character of thesurrounding area determines that such densities would be inappropriate.

The proposed development has a density of 50 dwellings per hectare which isconsistent with the provisions of Policy H14 and for this reason it is consideredthat the principle of developing two properties on this site is acceptable.

Character and appearanceThe area is characterised by blocks of terrace properties on Fairview Avenue,and on the western side of Chelmer Drive at the junction with Fairview Avenue. Inaddition there are semi-detached houses adjacent to the application site.


25/96

1484/25 15

2011

The proposed development would result in the creation of two dwellings, attachedto the side of No 1 Chelmer Drive, which is an end-terraced house, situated onthe north side of Fairview Avenue on the junction with Chelmer Drive.

The terraced design of the proposed dwellings is in keeping with the character ofthe surrounding development in the locality.

In addition to the terraced character and the open nature of the junctions thecorner houses at the junctions in the immediate vicinity are turned at 90 degreesfrom the rest to form bookends to the terraces. This characteristic finish to therow of terraces would be lost as a result of the new dwellings being stepped backas well as the two storey rearward projection that has been introduced.

The existing front elevation of the terraced block is defied by the evenly spaceddoor openings and porch areas to each residential unit. The new dwellingimmediately adjacent to No.1 would have its entrance facing Fairview Avenue inclose proximity to the entrance to No.1 whilst the second dwelling would have its

main access facing Chelmer Drive. As a result of these works the even spacingbetween the residential units would be lost further detracting from the character ofthe terraced block detrimental to the visual amenity of the street scene contrary topolicy CP1.

To the rear the proposed dwellings have each been finished with a pitched roofrear extension to match that of No 1. It is however considered that this roofdesign would result in three gabled features to the rear which unbalances theterrace when viewed from the north.

The existing dwelling is a corner plot and its front elevation currently facesChelmer Drive and is set about 11 metres from the edge of the footpath. Theproposed dwellings would extend to approximately 2 metres from the edge of the

footpath and it is considered that this would result in the closing down of thejunction detracting from the character and appearance of the area.

On the basis of the above it is considered that the proposed dwellingswould appear cramped on the site harmful to the character and appearance ofthe immediate area contrary to the aims and objectives of Policy CP1 of the LocalPlan. This view was shared by the Inspector when he dismissed the appeal inOctober 2008.

Neighbouring AmenityThe proposed rear elevations of the new dwellings would be set 15.8m from theboundary with the neighbouring property on Chelmer Drive. It is considered thatthis distance would be sufficient to not allow unacceptable levels of overlooking

from first floor windows in this urban area. A pathway separates the rear garden areas of the proposed development from

the property immediately to the rear of the application site. This pathway givesaccess from the parking area on Chelmer Drive to the rear gardens while inaddition allowing the bins to be moved from the rear garden to the highway verge.It is considered that the uncontrolled use of this pathway at all times would belikely to result in unacceptable noise and disturbance in close proximity to theimmediate neighbour detracting from their amenity contrary to Policy CP1.


26/96

1484/26 15

2011

Amenity SpaceAppendix 5 of the Local Plan indicates that 2 bedroom properties should providefor 75sq.m of amenity space. The proposed development satisfies this

requirement. Highways

The proposed works would result in the creation of 2 No. two bedroom propertieswhich would require two parking spaces per dwelling. In addition two parkingspaces would be required for the retained property at No.1 Chelmer Drive. Forthe proposed development to comply with Brentwood Borough Councils adoptedparking standards, 6 spaces would be required.

The submitted plans indicate that 3 spaces would be provided on a new parkingarea with access from Chelmer Drive.

Whilst the applicants indicate that the area is served by public transport and thatlocal amenities are within walking distance it is considered that a shortfall of 3

spaces would result in a substandard parking provision contrary to the aims andobjectives of Local Plan Policies.

In addition the Highways Officer indicates that the proposed spaces would fail tocomply with the size requirements as set out in the adopted standards and it isconsidered that insufficient space is available to allow for the provision of parkingspaces that would comply with the required standards.

On the basis of the above the proposed development would result in adevelopment with a substandard parking provision which is likely to give rise toon-street parking detrimental to highway and pedestrian safety.

Conclusion

Having regard to the matters raised in this report it is considered that the proposalwould result in a development that would appear cramped on its site and woulddetract from the character and appearance of the area detrimental to theappearance of the street scene in the immediate vicinity of the application sitecontrary to Policy CP1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan.

It is further also considered that the proposed works would result in adevelopment that development with a substandard parking provision which islikely to give rise to on-street parking detrimental to highway and pedestriansafety contrary to Policy T2 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan.


27/96

1484/27 15

2011

6. Recommendation

Refuse

1) The proposal would result in a development that would appear cramped on itssite and would not reflect or enhance the character and appearance of thearea around Chelmer Drive and Fairview Avenue and would for this reason bedetrimental to the visual amenity and character of the area and would,therefore conflict with policy CP1 of the adopted Brentwood ReplacementLocal Plan.

2) The proposed works would result in a development that development with asubstandard parking provision which is likely to give rise to on-street parkingdetrimental to highway and pedestrian safety contrary to Policy T2 of the

Brentwood Replacement Local Plan.

Informatives


FARRIERS THE ALLEY BLACKMORE INGATESTONE BRENTWOOD

TWO STOREY AND FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSION

BRW/141/2011

Ward: TIPPS CROSS Zoning: Residential

Parish: Blackmore, Hook End &Wyatts Green ParishCouncil

Policies: C14 CP1

Case Officer: Catherine Williams (Tel:01277 312617)


1. Proposals

This application is for an extension over the existing garage and a two storeyextension in front of the garage.

2. Relevant History

BRW/725/2001: Erection of attached double garage and single storey extensionat the front - Approved.

BRW/1083/2001: Amendment to planning permission BRW/725/2001 - Approved.


28/96

1484/28 15

2011

BRW/65/2003: Single storey side extension and erection of detached garage -Refused. The development by reason of mass, scale, siting and design would bedetrimental to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

BRW/451/2003: Single storey side extension and erection of detached garage -Refused. The development by reason of mass, scale, siting and design would bedetrimental to the character and appearance of the conservation area.


Historic buildings advisor: I am not opposed in principle to the design of theproposed extension apart from the problem that the existing garage block endsup jutting out from the side of the building, which is visually confusing. Therefore,I am unable to recommend approval because the proposal will be detrimental tothe character of the conservation area.

Historic environment officer: The proposed development lies within the historiccore of Blackmore and little archaeological fieldwork has been undertaken inBlackmore until recently which uncovered medieval activity dating to the 13thCentury. As such a condition should be imposed regarding the implementation ofa programme of archaeological work and an associated informative.

Highways: No objection. Blackmore, Hook End and Wyatts Green Parish Council: Due to the property's

close proximity to Blacksmiths Alley the new gable end will appear very dominantand overbearing from the Alley.


None.


The application property is a detached dwelling located within the Blackmoreconservation area. The property is located on a corner plot, the house is situatedto the rear of the plot with the main garden areas to the side. This part of theconservation area comprises houses of mixed design, period and size. A numberof the dwellings in the area are of little architectural merit and make alimited contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area.

The proposed extension would result in a gable projection that would beapproximately 3m from the edge of Blacksmiths Alley. Although the road isnarrow it is considered that, by reason of the open character of the plot and thelocation of the dwelling it would not have a detrimental affect on the character andappearance of the street scene.

The historic buildings advisor has commented on the poor design as a result ofthe garage projection. However, it is considered that side elevation at groundfloor level would appear similar to existing and as such would preserve thecharacter of the conservation area; therefore notwithstanding the comments ofthe historic buildings advisor it is considered that a refusal on this basis would notbe justified.


29/96

1484/29 15

2011

Having regard to the above it is considered that the proposal complies withpolicies CP1 and C14 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan.

6. Recommendation

Approve


2) No development or preliminary groundworks of any kind shall take place untilthe applicant has secured the implementation of a programme ofarchaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation thathas been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local PlanningAuthority.

(Reason: To investigate whether there is archeologically important materialon site.)

3) The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance withdrawing nos. 001A and 002A.(Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives



3) The Historic Environment Officer advices that the archaeological work shouldbe carried out by a team of professional archaeologists. An archaeologicalbriefing outlining the level of investigation will be issued from Essex CountyCouncil on request.


30/96

1484/30 15

2011

19 SUNRAY AVENUE HUTTON BRENTWOOD

TWO STOREY SIDE AND REAR EXTENSION, LOFT CONVERSIONINCORPORATING FRONT AND REAR DORMER WINDOWS AND PITCHED ROOFOVER ENTRANCE AND BAY WINDOWS

BRW/144/2011

Ward: HUTTON EAST Zoning: Residential

Parish: Policies: CP1 H17 H7



1. Proposals

Two storey side extension with a half hipped roof and increasing the roof by0.30m;

Loft conversion incorporating a front and rear dormer window with pitched roofs; Rear extension; New pitched roof over bay windows. Painted render finish to proposed extension.

2. Relevant History

None relevant.


Highways - The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to thisapplication as the area available for parking within the site, will comply with theBrentwood Borough Council adopted planning standards, for the proposedextended dwelling.


None.


This application relates to one of the smallest detached bungalows in the streetwhich does not have accommodation in the roofspace. The street comprises twostorey dwellings and chalet bungalows some of which have had extensions to theroof.


31/96

1484/31 15

2011

This application proposes to raise the roof of the bungalow to a half hipped roofon one side of the property and erect a front and rear dormer window with pitchedroofs. The proposal is similar to the roof extension at no.14 Sunray Avenue.

As the existing roof would have the head height to convert the loft without theneed for planning permission, policy H7 would not apply.

The dormer windows would be subsidiary features of the roof and would not havea detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene,complying with policy H17.

The two storey proposed development would be set off the boundary adjoiningno. 23 by 1 metre. It is considered the proposal would not have an unacceptableaffect by way of being overbearing, loss of light or overlooking on the occupiers ofno. 23. The proposed rear extension would be set approximately 2.7m from theboundary adjoining no.17 and approximately 3m past their rear wall. No. 23 hasan adjoining garage building along the boundary and the proposed extension

would not be as deep as this. It is considered the rear extension would not havean unacceptable detrimental affect on the occupiers of either adjoining propertiesand is considered to comply with policy CP1.

In light of the above, it is considered the proposal would comply with Local PlanPolicies CP1 and H17 and is recommended for approval.

6. Recommendation

Approve



3) The plans relevant to this permission are: Dwg. No. 5772-01, 5772-02, 5772-03 and 5772-04.(Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives

1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development planpolicies relevant to this proposal that are set out below.




32/96

1484/32 15

2011

40 KING GEORGES ROAD PILGRIMS HATCH BRENTWOOD

PROPOSED NEW END TERRACE DWELLING ADJACENT TO 40 KING GEORGESROAD

BRW/148/2011

Ward: PILGRIMS HATCH Zoning: Residential

Parish: Policies: CP1 T2



1. Proposals

The proposed development would result in a two storey side and single storeyrear extension to the side of No. 40 King Georges Road. These extensionswould facilitate the creation of a new attached 3 bedroom dwelling.

The extensions would have the following maximum dimensions: 6m in width,10.15m in depth at ground floor and 7m at first floor and will be finished with aridge height of 8.4m similar to that of No. 40.

The proposed development would have a garden area of 148sq.m which leavesthe donor property with 221sq.m of garden.

Both the proposed dwelling and the donor property would have two parking

spaces

2. Relevant History

BRW/7/2011 Erection of a detached two storey three bedroom dwelling Withdrawn


Highways: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to theabove application, subject to suitable conditions being attached to any approval,

given that the existing layout and the area available for parking within the site willcomply with Brentwood Borough Councils adopted parking standards, for theproposed dwelling.


33/96

1484/33 15

2011


Three letters of objection and a petition signed by 10 residents have beenreceived. The matters raised in the letters were also duplicated in the petitionand these can be summarized as follows:

- Congestion due to lack of parking- Change the character and appearance of the area- Loss of habitat for Great Crested Newts.- Proposal would be harmful to the character of the street scene- Overdevelopment of the site contrary to PPS3- Loss of light and privacy to and the development being overbearing onthe outside dining area of No. 38- Loss of privacy to rear garden space, including the patio, the barbeque

area and conservatory at No. 38 as a result of direct overlooking from theside facing windows proposed.- Increased pressure on storm water drainage- Proximity to electricity substation- Loss of wildlife to the area

The matter of loss to property value was also raised, but this is not a materialplanning consideration.

5. Summary of Issues The application site forms part of the residential curtilage of No. 40 King Georges

Road and will result in an attached dwelling being constructed on the area of

hardstanding currently occupied by a detached garage and a flat roofed singlestorey side extension.

Character and appearance:The area in the immediate vicinity of the application site is characterised by semi-detached and terraced properties. Some of these properties have been extendedthrough the addition of two storey side extensions. In addition the application siteis located in a prominent location opposite the junction of Osborne and KingGeorges Roads.

The submitted plans indicate that the proposed dwelling would be of a similarwidth to No. 40 while it would be finished with a hipped roof similar to that of theexisting pair.

The proposed works would be separated from the nearest neighbour at No. 38 bya substation thereby maintaining an open aspect when approaching fromOsborne Road.

The proposed parking arrangements to the front of the proposed development aswell as No. 40 would result in most of this area being covered in hardstanding.Whilst this would result in a parking dominated frontage it is noted that propertiesin the immediate vicinity have had similar works done to accommodate theparking of vehicles and for this reason the parking to the front of the applicationsite would maintain the character and appearance of the street scene.


34/96

1484/34 15

2011

For the above reasons it is considered that the proposed scheme due to its scale,bulk and design would not unbalance the existing properties and would notdetract from the character and appearance of the immediate area or the street

scene in general. Neighbouring amenity:

The proposed development would result in a single storey rear extension whichwould extend 3m beyond the rear elevation of the attached neighbour at No. 40and would be finished with a sloping roof. It is considered that this extensiongiven its overall depth and height would not detract from the amenities of theattached neighbours. Any deeper extensions in close proximity to the boundarycould however result in a loss of amenity through being overbearing and for thisreason it is considered that a condition removing permitted development rights forextensions should be included in any approval.A letter of objection has been received form the occupiers of No. 38 King

Georges Road raising concerns about loss of light, loss of privacy and thedevelopment being overbearing in relation to an undercover dinning area. Inaddition there is concern that there would be a loss of privacy to the patio area,the barbeque area, the private rear garden and conservatory due to directoverlooking from side facing windows in the proposed development.With regard to these matters, the proposed dwelling would be separated from theundercover dining area of No. 38 by the electricity substation. It is consideredthat this separation distance allows sufficient room between the proposeddwelling and No. 38 to ensure that this neighbour would not experience anyharmful loss of amenity due to a loss of light or the development beingoverbearing.

A further matter relating to a loss of privacy is also raised. The submitted plansindicate that two sets of windows would be included in the side elevation facingNo. 38 one of these would be at ground floor with the second at first floor servingthe stairwell. Views from the ground floor window would be screened by a 1.8mhigh fence which would be required by condition between the proposeddevelopment and the adjoining neighbours at No. 38. The first floor windowserving the stairwell would due to the alignment of the properties allow obliqueviews across to the rear garden, patio area and barbeque area of No. 38. For thisreason it is considered that a suitably worded condition to obscure glaze thisstairwell window should be included to any approval to prevent overlooking ofthese rear amenity areas.

On the basis of the above it is considered that the proposed development wouldcomply with the requirements of Policy CP1 (ii).

Amenity space:The submitted plans indicate that the proposed dwelling would have an amenityarea of 148sq.m while the donor property would maintain 221sq.m of amenityarea which complies with the requirements as set out in Appendix 5 of The LocalPlan.


35/96

1484/35 15

2011

Protected Species:In the letters of objection as well as in the petition that was received mention ismade of the presence of Great Crested Newts on the application site and that the

proposed development would result in the loss of habitat for Great CrestedNewts.

Natural England indicate that for minor developments (as is the case here) itshould be established whether there is suitable Newt habitat within 100m of theapplication site. If suitable habitat does exist then a survey would be required toestablish the extent of the population.

A site visit was conducted at the application site and no pond or any othersuitable habitat was found. In addition local enquiries were made and noevidence was found to suggest that there are likely to be Great Crested Newts inthe immediate area of the application site.

Highways:

It is indicated that both the application site and the donor property would have twoparking spaces available. Whilst the spaces as shown on the submitted plans failto comply with the dimensions for parking bays as set out in Brentwood BoroughCouncils adopted standards it is considered that there is sufficient space toprovide parking bays which would comply and these can be secured by a suitablyworded condition to any approval. These spaces would then provide sufficient offstreet parking compliant with Brentwood Borough Councils adopted parkingstandards. This view is supported by comments from the Highways Officer.

On the basis of the above it is considered that the proposed development wouldcomply with Policy T2 of The Local Plan.

Conclusion:

It is consider that the proposed development of an attached end terrace dwellingwould comply with the aims and objectives of the relevant BrentwoodReplacement Local Plan Policies and approval is recommended on this basis.

6. Recommendation

Approve


2) Notwithstanding the details on the approved plans, the materials to be usedin the construction of the external surfaces of the new dwelling herebypermitted shall match in colour and texture those used in the existing semi-detached pair unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planningauthority.(Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the terrace aswell as the immediate area.)


36/96

1484/36 15

2011

3) Prior to the commencement of the development, revised details of thereplacement access and parking area for No. 40 King Georges Road shall besubmitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Prior tothe construction of the proposed dwelling the access and parking area shallbe constructed in accordance with the approved details.(Reason: To ensure that on street parking of vehicles in the adjoining streetsdoes not occur in the interests of highway safety and that appropriate parkingis provided in accordance with Policy DM8 of Essex County CouncilsDevelopment Management policies.)

4) Prior to construction of the access to the proposed dwelling the existingstreet lighting column in the area of the proposed access shall be relocated.(Reason: To ensure the access is not obstructed and the existing streetlighting column is not damaged in the interest of highway safety.)

5) The stairwell window shall be:- a) glazed using obscured glass to a minimumof level 3 of the Pilkington scale of obscuration and b) non-opening below aheight of 1.7m above the highest point of the treads of the immediatelyadjacent staircase. And that window shall remain so glazed and non-openable. (Note the application of translucent film to clear glazed windowsdoes not satisfy the requirements of this condition).(Reason: Reason - In order to prevent an unacceptable degree ofoverlooking of nearby residential properties.)

6) Details of the facilities to be provided for the storage of bicycles shall besubmitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior tothe commencement of the development. The approved facilities shall be

provided in accordance with the those details prior to the first use of any ofthe accommodation hereby permitted and thereafter the accommodationshall not be occupied unless those facilities are retained.(Reason: To ensure that adequate provision is made in order to safeguardthe character and appearance of the area.)

7) Details of the surfacing materials of driveways and parking areas shall besubmitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior tothe commencement of the development hereby approved and constructionshall be in strict accordance with those approved details.(Reason: In order to safeguard the character and appearance of the area.)

8) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General

Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting ormodifying that Order), the dwelling hereby permitted shall not be extended orenlarged in any way without the prior grant of specific planning permission bythe local planning authority.(Reason: To safeguard the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouringdwellings.)


37/96

1484/37 15

2011

9) Aside from those indicated on the approved drawings, and notwithstandingthe provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General PermittedDevelopment) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifyingthat Order), no windows, dormer windows, glazed doors or rooflights shall beconstructed without the prior grant of specific planning permission by thelocal planning authority.(Reason: To safeguard the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouringdwellings.)

10) Prior to the commencement of the development details of a screen wall orfence of not less than 1.8 metres in height to be erected on the boundarieswith No's 38 and 40 King Georges Road shall be submitted to and approvedin writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not beoccupied until the wall or fence has been erected in accordance with theapproved details and the wall or fence shall thereafter be permanentlyretained and maintained.(Reason: To safeguard the living conditions of adjacent occupiers.)

11) Unless formally permitted by the local planning authority the developmenthereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance withthe approved drawing numbered C10164/02 Rev A and specifications.(Reason: To ensure that the development is as permitted by the localplanning authority and for the avoidance of doubt.)

Informatives

1) Reason for approval:- The proposal would accord with the development planpolicies relevant to this proposal that are set out below. The Council has hadregard to the concerns raised by nearby residents but is considered that anyharm to living conditions that may result from the proposal would not besufficient to justify the refusal of permission.




38/96

1484/38 15

2011

46B CROSSWAYS SHENFIELD BRENTWOOD

CHANGE OF USE FROM B1 TO D2 (FOR USE AS A PERSONAL TRAININGSTUDIO)

BRW/150/2011

Ward: SHENFIELD Zoning: Shops/Offices

Parish: Policies: CP1 E2



1. Proposals

Change of use from Class B1 (Offices) to Class D2 (Assembly and Leisure) for aprivate gymnasium.

The applicant has submitted a short statement stating interalia:- No external changes are proposed to the existing building. There might be aneed in future to include external air-conditioning units. In addition signage wouldbe required on the outside of the building.- The building would provide and exclusive personal training studio used by theapplicant as well as 2 or 3 other personal trainers.- The proposed hours are Monday to Thursday 06:00 22:00, Friday 06:00

20:00 and Saturday and Sunday 08:00 17:00(It should be noted that Drg's no. 02 and 04 submitted as part of this application,showing the North Elevation, is inaccurate as this elevation only has the smallbathroom windows shown on the floor plans and does not have the largewindows shown).

2. Relevant History

BRW/108/2007 Partial demolition of ground floor offices to form 2no. parkingspaces, construction of first floor offices above, changes to fenestration Withdrawn


Highways: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to theabove application given the previous use of the site, the location, guidance inPPG 13 and the Brentwood Borough Councils adopted parking standards.


39/96

1484/39 15

2011

Environmental Health: This department has concerns regarding potential noisedisturbance to the adjoining business as well as the adjacent residentialpremises. Although the applicant states he intends to have background music

only, once the premises has changed to this D2 Class use, the occupier canchange to noisy activities from amplified sound like a concert hall, dance hall,aerobics studio etc. Amplified sound could carry through the building structure(ceiling etc.) causing disturbance to the front commercial premises or couldescape through the roof, doors, windows etc. causing disturbance to theneighbouring residential property. As such, this Service would recommend that areport is submitted to this Service demonstrating that noise from this Class usecan be controlled so as not to cause disturbance to neighbouring properties,bearing in mind the opening hours applied for.

In addition, details of all plant and machinery associated with the proposed

buildings within the development (especially all air handling equipment) to beagreed with the Council to ensure noise levels do not adversely affect localresidents.


Three letters of objection have been received. The matters raised can besummarised as follows:- Public would now have access to the site- Lack of parking- Use of load music with early and late opening times

- Alterations to the outside of the building in the form of signage would detractfrom the character and appearance of the area.


The site is situated on the edge of the Shenfield shopping centre with shops andoffices to the south and residential property to the north. The two storey buildingfronting onto Crossways has the appearance of a traditional single detacheddwelling and is in character with the adjoining houses. The single storey sectionto the rear also has a pitched roof and a traditional appearance. It has beenidentified within the Local Plan for shops and or office uses. Policy E2 of the

Local Plan seeks to retain office development areas. Whilst the Council has allowed similar changes of use in employment areas,

these units had been vacant for an extended period of time with little prospect ofattracting employment generating uses. In this instance the building is currentlybeing used as offices and the applicant indicates that the lease is becomingavailable. There is no indication of any marketing exercise to enable thecontinued use of the premises for offices.


40/96

1484/40 15

2011

Given the location of the building in relation to Shenfield Town Centre andShenfield Station it is considered that it forms an important source of primaryemployment floor space that should be retained. Small units of this nature are

considered to be suitable for small starter businesses and no evidence has beensubmitted to demonstrate that there is no reasonable expectation of this unit notbeing retained for office use.

On this basis it is considered that the proposal would lead to the loss of premisesallocated for office employment purposes contrary to Policy E2 and no matters ofsufficient weight have been identified to overcome the policy harm.

Neighbouring amenity:Use of this unit as a personal training studio would be likely to result in musicbeing played, whilst air-conditioning units might also be required in future. Allthese elements are likely to result in an increase in the general noise anddisturbance associated with this location.

It is however considered that, the absence of main window openings in theelevation facing the immediate neighbour, the presence of loading areas to therear of the shops and the ability to include conditions to control noise levels fromair-conditioning units, any additional noise generated by the change of use wouldnot detract from the amenities of the neighbouring properties.

Parking:The existing office building is located in close proximity to Shenfield High Street,as well as a car parking area in Hunter Avenue. For this reason it is consideredthat there would be sufficient parking available within walking distance of the sitea view that is shared by the Highways Officer.

Conclusion:

In light of the above it is considered the proposal fails to comply with theprovisions of policy E2 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan and no mattersof sufficient weight have been identified to overcome the policy harm.

6. Recommendation

Refuse

1) The proposed change of use would result in the loss of an office unit within anarea allocated for office purposes and is therefore contrary to Policy E2 of theBrentwood Replacement Local Plan. Approval would undermine the Local

Planning Authority's policy to retain office space within the area so allocatedthereby diminishing the scope of accommodation for a primary employmentuse.

Informatives



41/96

1484/41 15

2011

GRAYLINGS COTTAGE HORSEMAN SIDE NAVESTOCKSIDE BRENTWOOD

ROOF ALTERATIONS INCORPORATING THREE FRONT DORMER WINDOWS

BRW/151/2011

Ward: BRIZES ANDDODDINGHURST

Zoning: Metropolitan Green Belt

Parish: Navestock Parish Council Policies: CP1 GB2 GB5 H17



1. Proposals

Raising the height of the roof by approximately 1.5m on the west side of theproperty with a half hipped roof and three new dormer windows with pitchedroofs.

Raising the height of the roof by approximately 1m from the front andapproximately 2.2m from the existing flat roof on the east side of the property witha hipped roof.

2. Relevant History

BRW/818/99 - Erection of single storey side extension incorporating a balconytogether with erection of car port at front. Approved 13/12/99.

BRW/43/96 - Two storey side extension. Refused 11/03/96. BRW/278/97 - Retention of barn. Refused 2/06/97. BRW/658/06 - Erection of 2no. two storey extensions at the front together with a

dormer window and open porch at the front. Refused 4/09/06. BRW/565/07 - Erection of two storey and single storey extensions at the front and

incorporating a dormer window at the front. Awaiting section 106 agreement. BRW/20/08 - Two storey and single storey extensions at the front incorporating a

dormer window and bay window. Approved subject to section 106 agreement.7/01/11.


Highways - The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to thisapplication as the area available for parking within the site, will comply with theBrentwood Borough Council adopted parking standards, for the proposedextended dwelling.

Navestock Parish Council - Object on the grounds this application is making arelatively low key building into a large scale building, inappropriate developmentfor a rural location, over development and object to extensions to the property.


42/96

1484/42 15

2011


None.


This application relates to a detached chalet style bungalow located in theMetropolitan Green Belt, which has previously been extended.

The three front dormers proposed would create approximately 3.24m2

ofadditional habitable floorspace. The dormers would remain a subsidiary feature ofthe roof, be set in from any wall of the property and below the ridge height andwould comply with Local Plan Policy H17.

Whilst the proposal would increase the height and bulk of parts of the dwelling, itis considered that the alterations proposed would not materially reduce the

openness of the Green Belt compared with the existing dwelling. It appears thatsome elements of the existing building may not have had the necessarypermissions however this application is only for the development describedabove. The "table top" roof over part of the building would create the potentialfor additional floorspace which would be a significant breach of the policies ofconstraint in the green belt. It is recommended that a condition is imposed toprevent the use of that area apart from domestic storage.

As there are no nearby properties adjoining Graylings Cottage or immediatelyopposite, the proposed works would not adversely affect any neighbours.

It is considered the proposal would comply with Policy CP1, GB2, GB5 and H17.

6. Recommendation

Approve



3) This permission relates only to the matters set out in the description of

development . The plans relevant to this permission are: JTS/7266/01, 2652-16 and 2652-02.(Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.)

4) The proposed roof area above the area described as living room, cinema andstudy shall not be adapted or used for any purpose other than domesticstorage associated with the dwelling.(Reason: To prevent a disproportionate enlargement of the dwelling thatwould conflict with the policies of restraint of development in the Green Belt.)


43/96

1484/43 15

2011

5) Aside from those indicated on the approved drawings, and notwithstanding

the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General PermittedDevelopment) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifyingthat Order) no dormer windows, or rooflights shall be constructed and nochange shall be made to the shape of the roofs without the prior grant ofspecific planning permission by the local planning authority.(Reason: To prevent the creation of additional habitable accommodation thatwould result in disproportionate enlargement of the dwelling that wouldconflict with the policies of restraint of development in the Green Belt.)

Informatives

1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development planpolicies relevant to this proposal that are set out below. The Council has hadregard to the concerns raised by Navestock Parish Council but is consideredthat the resulting building would not have an unacceptable affect on thecharacter and appearance of the street scene and would not justify the refusalof permission.



8 HOLDEN GARDENS WARLEY BRENTWOOD

PART TWO STOREY, PART SINGLE STOREY FRONT, SIDE AND REAREXTENSIONS.

BRW/154/2011

Ward: WARLEY Zoning: Residential

Parish: Policies: CP1

Case Officer: Helen Bealey (Tel: 01277

312604)

8/13 Week Date: 2nd May 2011

1. Proposals

The part two storey and part single storey extension extends the full width at therear of the property and the full depth of the North side of the property, theextension wraps round to the front of the property and includes a forwardprojection of 1.9m. Alterations to the front of the property also include a new baywindow, new porch and new pitched roof over both these elements.


44/96

1484/44 15

2011

2. Relevant History

PD/77/66: Conservatory- Permitted Development PD/427/69: Porch- Permitted Development.


Highways: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to theabove application as the area available for parking within the site, will comply withthe Brentwood Borough Council adopted parking standards for the proposedextended dwelling.


One letter of representation:o The 4m extension would significantly reduce the natural light to the rear of

their property.o Does not want the side extension to extend over the boundary, including

the soffits or guttering.


The part two storey and single storey 'wrap around' extension is proposed to therear, North side and front of a detached property, in a residential area.

The property is located in a cul-de-sac, which has detached houses and

bungalows, all constructed at roughly the same time, although of varyingdesigns. Some of the properties have been extended already and thesealterations can be seen from the highway.

The alterations to the front and side of the property would considerably changethe look of the property. The new pitched roofs above the porch and new baywindow would be in keeping with other extended properties in the area.

The front extensions also include a new forward projection with a re-positionedgarage door. The garage door is off set to one side of the new forwardprojection, which results in an unbalanced appearance.

However, taking into account the varied designs of properties and previousextensions to neighbouring properties it is considered that the proposal would not

have an unacceptable detrimental effect on the character and appearance of thesurrounding area.

The rear extension is to be part two storey and part single storey. The propertiesare staggered and 10 Holden Gardens extends deeper to the rear and 6 HoldenGardens is slightly shallower. The two storey element is proposed to be closerto the side boundary with 10 Holden Garden and would not extend any deeperthan this neighbouring property.

10 Holden Gardens is a bungalow and has a side window which would face theproposed extension. This window is an obscure glazed and secondary window.It is considered that the extensions would not have an unacceptable detrimentaleffect on the general amenities of 10 Holden Gardens.


45/96

1484/45 15

2011

The other neighbouring property, 6 Holden Gardens, already has a single storeyrear extension and a conservatory, but, the part of the property closest to theextension does not extend as deep to the rear as the application property. The

proposed single storey rear extension would extend 4m beyond theneighbouring single storey extension and would be located 1m from theside boundary.

The nearest rear door of the neighbouring property serves an open plan; lounge,kitchen and dining room, there are large glass doors to the rear of the property,as well as a conservatory to the back of the single storey extension.

The side boundary between 6 and 8 Holden Gardens is well landscaped withbushes and trees, although some of these would have to be removed to constructthe extensions. Due to the proximity, design and overall size of the proposedextension and taking into account the neighbours extension, it is considered thatit would not have an unacceptable detrimental effect on the neighbouring property

and it is considered that it would not give rise to an unacceptable loss of light tothe rear of the neighbouring property.

In light of the above, it is considered that the proposal would comply with PolicyCP1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan.

6. Recommendation

Approve


2) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of theextension hereby permitted shall match in colour and texture to those used inthe existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local PlanningAuthority.(Reason: In the interests of amenity.)

3) M10 - Retention of window pattern

4) The following plans are relevant to this permission: drawing numbers,2511:01, 2511:02.(Reason: For the avoidance of doubt.)

Informa

Weekly Report - Refusal Reason Page 74

Documents

Transcript of Weekly Report - Refusal Reason Page 74