Bath & North East Somerset Council

TITLE:

APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION ETC.

WARD:

ALL

BACKGROUND PAPERS: See over

AN OPEN PUBLIC ITEM

Kingsmead Motor Company 5-10 James Street West Bath BA1 2BZ

Depot & Land At Junction Of Lower Bristol Road & Brougham Hayes Bath BA2 3QU

Great Western Antiques Centre St Andrews Terrace Bath BA1 2QR

Land Adjoining The Boathouse Newbridge Road Bath BA1 3JX

15-16 Northgate Street Bath BA1 5AS

15-16 Northgate Street Bath BA1 5AS

20 Milsom Street Bath BA1 1DE

20 Milsom Street Bath BA1 1DE

Land Rear Of 24-28 Tyning Terrace Bath

106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

Former British Gas Clevelands Building Sydney Wharf Bath BA2 4EP

Baskervilles Gym Englishcombe Lane Bath BA2 2EF

40 Gladstone Road Bath BA2 5HL

10 St Marys Close Bath BA2 6BR

6 Chelsea Road Bath BA1 3DU

7 Upper Lansdown Mews Bath BA1 5HG

Car Park Adjoining All Saints Place Bath BA2 6DU

Green Park Station Green Park Road Bath BA1 1JB

Garden Flat Vale Lodge Weston Park West Bath BA1 4AR

Argyle Works Lower Bristol Road Bath BA2 3DB

21 Sladebrook Avenue Bath BA2 2LB

187 Englishcombe Lane Bath BA2 2EW

39 Fairfield Avenue Bath BA1 6NJ

3 Green Cottages Combe Down Bath BA2 5HG

Land Rear Of The Rose And Laurel Car Park Rush Hill Bath

Bath Spa Hotel Sydney Road Bath BA2 6NU

APPLICATION NO. 99/00485/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 16th Jul 1999

WARD Kingsmead

Conservation Area Floodland

APPLICANT: Kingsmead Motor Co/Penhalt/RSW Plc

PROPOSAL: Erection of new multi screen cinema, leisure club and restaurant facilities after demolition of existing commercial garage

SITE LOCATION: Kingsmead Motor Company 5-10 James Street West Bath BA1 2BZ

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

A separate report will be circulated.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00602/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 23rd Aug 1999

WARD Widcombe

Floodland

APPLICANT: The Avon And Somerset Police Authority And RSW Plc

PROPOSAL: Erection of Hotel & Auditorium (both with A3) after demolition of existing depot & office, change of use from depot to restaurant with C1 or D1 over & managers flat in existing building altered, on site parking & relocation of classroom hut

SITE LOCATION: Depot & Land At Junction Of Lower Bristol Road & Brougham Hayes Bath BA2 3QU

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The site subject to this application is approximately 0.57 hectares in area and is located at the south east corner of the signalised junction of Lower Bristol Road and Brougham Hayes. The site is currently shared by depot uses for both Bath and North East Somerset Council and the Avon and Somerset Police Authority. There are a number of existing buildings at the site, the most prominent ones being a flat-roofed two storey office block situated on the Lower Bristol Road frontage and a pitched roof building situated along the Brougham Hayes frontage. Vehicular access to the site is taken off Brougham Hayes. A temporary classroom building used by Hayesfield School is also located at the site. There are a variety of trees located mainly around the perimeter of the site, the terrace of dwellings situated on the opposite side of Brougham Hayes are Grade II listed, however, the site lies outside of the Bath Conservation Area. The site is adjoined to the south by Hayesfield School and to the east by St James' Cemetery. Located on the opposite side of Lower Bristol Road is Longmead Gospel Hall and the new Sainsbury's petrol filling station.

This application seeks full planning permission for the erection of a 126 bed hotel and the alteration and conversion of the existing building along the Brougham Hayes frontage to form a public house/restaurant. The existing classroom unit would also be re-located within the site. Vehicular access to the development would still be taken from Brougham Hayes, however, from a position further away from the signalised junction than the existing access. Pedestrian access to the site would also be available from Lower Bristol Road. On site parking would be provided on a communal basis. The application originally also proposed the erection of a 400 seat auditorium for the performing arts, however, this part of the proposal has been removed from the application.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Consultations

Engineering Services: No objections regarding traffic generation and levels of parking provision. Final details of access arrangements are to be agreed. The first floor activity space within the Pavilion shall be ancillary to the main use.

Building Control: The ground on this site is poor and piled foundations will be required. It is understood that a site investigation has been carried out.

Wessex Water: No objections.

Private Sector Renewal: No observations

Environment Agency: No objections. Further investigations should be carried out to properly characterise the extent of any contamination from existing underground petrol tanks and risk presented to receptors.

Planning Policy: No objections in principle.

Environmental Practice: Object to the proposal on the grounds of adverse impact on trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order.

Representations

Bath Preservation Trust: Comment that they approve of the scheme, but raise concern over the proposed choice of materials:

(i) The scheme introduces a significant amount of render to all 3 buildings, especially the hotel. If render is granted, it must be natural stone colour and not ochre as proposed.

(ii) A greater effort should be made to use natural stone to all elevation details eg. window cills and not reconstructed stone.

(iii) Concern is raised over the type of metal roofing to all three buildings and the "shiny" appearance this inevitably creates. It is suggested that turn-coated stainless steel should be considered which readily takes on a matt appearance, more in keeping with traditional lead roofs.

(iv) A boundary wall of natural stone and railings would be far more attractive and less hostile than the proposed 6ft metal wire fence bordering the school playing fields.

Local Residents: One letter has been received, raising the following concerns:

(i) Light pollution

(ii) Increased noise created by deliveries and loud music

(iii) Litter – if the proposed restaurant has a take-away facility

(iv) Loss of natural light

(v) Loss of value of properties.

PLANNING ISSUES

1. Planning History

In 1967 planning permission was granted (8335) for the change of use from a Territorial Army Centre to a maintenance garage for police vehicles and a road motor patrol centre.

Various planning permissions have subsequently been granted, relating to additional buildings, hardstandings and boundary treatments at the site.

2. Relevant Policies

Bath Local Plan

Policy E1: Employment Generating Development

Policy E2: Retention of Existing Sources of Employment

Policy H15: Residential Amenity

Policy V1: Tourist Related Development

Policy T1: Balanced Transportation Strategy

Policy T12: Private Car Parking

Policy T20: Conditions for Pedestrians and the Mobility Impaired

Policy T25: Highway Development Control Criteria

Policies L5 and L20: Protection of Existing Trees and Landscape Design

Policy C1: World Heritage Site

Policy C2: Design

Policies C11, C19 and C20: Preservation of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest and Their Settings

3. Principle of Development

There are no relevant policies in the Bath Local Plan concerning the development of new hotels or public houses/restaurants within the existing urban area. Policies relating to the conversion of existing buildings and the development of previously developed sites are often assessed against Local Plan policies protecting the existing housing stock and preventing the loss of employment. The application does not involve any existing residential accommodation, the police authority merely use their part of the depot for the storage of vehicles and the Council's Property Services Section is currently exploring various options regarding the re-location of the Council's part of the depot. Officers consider, therefore, that there are no objections to the principle of the proposed development.

4. Transportation

A detailed Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) has been submitted in support of the application. Following lengthy consideration of the issues, officers concur with the conclusions of the TIA, which are that the local highway network, including the signalised junction of Brougham Hayes/Lower Bristol Road, has sufficient capacity to cater for the proposed development, even allowing for general traffic growth.

The proposed vehicular access into the site would be situated approximately 13 metres further away from the signalised junction than the existing access, adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. Officers consider that the revised access arrangements would result in an improvement over the existing access arrangements with improved levels of visibility. A raised table crossover is proposed at the site entrance in order to reduce vehicle speeds, and final details of the access arrangements are required by condition.

A total of 91 vehicle parking spaces are proposed at the site. Officers consider that this level of provision strikes the right balance between minimising on-street parking in the locality whilst acknowledging the site's location on a bus route and in reasonable walking distance of the City Centre and also two railway stations. The parking areas would operate on a shared basis between the proposed uses at the site.

The proposed development allows for the creation of a new pedestrian access into the site approximately halfway along the Lower Bristol Road frontage. A segregated pedestrian route would then run along the centre line of the site. The pedestrian route would then give way to a shared surface before re-joining the footpath along Brougham Hayes. One of the ideas behind the proposed site layout is to create a more desirable environment for pedestrians in the area, away from the busy signalised junction. Officers are satisfied that the proposed layout achieves this aim whilst preventing pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, by creating a suitably traffic calmed environment in the form of a new public square. These principles can be further developed during the approval of surface treatments and street furniture, which is required by condition.

5. Design and Layout

Taking the existing depot building situated on the Brougham Hayes frontage first, it is proposed that this building is to be altered and converted into a public house/restaurant. Referred to in the application as "The Pavilion" this altered building is meant to act as a lightweight and subservient element of the development and also the surrounding area. It is proposed to reduce the length of the existing building by almost 9 metres, to amend the side elevations in order to create more first floor accommodation, and to reconstruct the roof resulting in a minor increase in height (300mm) to approximately 10 metres. The building would be extensively glazed, in order to create the required lightweight appearance, with render infill panels either screening servicing areas or protecting residential amenity, and opaque glass canopies on metal brackets on the elevations facing Brougham Hayes and the new square. The roof would be metal profiled sheeting. Officers are satisfied that the building would serve the purpose of being an interesting feature at the corner of the development, whilst retaining the main elements of a building of character in the area, and not harming the setting of the listed terrace opposite by not materially increasing the scale of the building.

The proposed hotel building would be situated close to the eastern boundary of the site. The design of the hotel is based on three Bath stone towers linked by rendered elevations. The building would have a metal roof and glass canopies on metal brackets in order to match the pavilion building. The hotel would mainly be four storey, being full four storey at the rear, giving way to parapet level accommodation along most of the building, before finally becoming three storey at the Lower Bristol Road frontage. The building would have a maximum height of 13 metres. Officers have no objections to the mass and scale of the proposed building and consider that the scale of the building would satisfactorily relate to other three and four storey commercial buildings in the locality. Officers are of the view that the elevations of the hotel would be sufficiently relieved by proposed fenestration, which would involve stone surrounds, the "wrap around" glazed ground floor bar area, and generally by the variety of the elevations.

In terms of general layout, officers consider that the proposed development would create a quality public environment in the form of a public square. Although the primary purpose of the square would be to provide parking areas, the inclusion of a segregated central pedestrian access route, the creation of outdoor seating areas relating to the pavilion, and the traffic calmed nature of the space lead officers to consider that a quality environment would result. The use of quality surface treatments, street furniture and new landscaping would further enhance this environment. The hotel would create a sense of enclosure to the square, with the pavilion forming a more lightweight and subservient element within the square. From within the square, views will be available of Hayesfield School, which is situated at a higher level. The proposed siting of the temporary classroom unit would compromise this objective, therefore, the re-location of the classroom unit is only recommended for approval on a temporary basis.

6. Landscape

The most significant trees in the locality are situated within the grounds of Hayesfield School and St James' Cemetery and also on the Lower Bristol Road frontage outside of the Cemetery. Within the application site, however, there are also a number of trees of high visual amenity value. These trees are mainly situated at the north west and north east corners of the site. Between these groups of trees is a line of young trees that currently provide an effective screen between the depot and Lower Bristol Road. In the spirit of opening up the site to the public, officers have no objections to the proposed removal of these less significant trees. Of the more significant trees, two of those located at the corner of Brougham Hayes and Lower Bristol Road are now proposed to be retained, with two others removed in order to allow the remaining ones to develop.

Protracted negotiations have taken place between officers and the applicants, including the Council's Arboricultural Officer, regarding the trees located in the north east corner of the site. During these negotiations officers made a Tree Preservation Order regarding two Ash and a Lime, in order to protect the Council's position regarding this matter. The applicant has revised the siting of the hotel on a number of occasions in order to address this issue. The original application retained just one of these trees, in a situation that would have prejudiced its long term amenity value, in the opinion of officers. The revised proposal, which officers find acceptable, is to retain the Ash and Lime directly in front of the hotel, sufficiently far away from the proposed building so as to protect their long term amenity value. In exchange for this, officers find acceptable the proposed removal of the other Ash, as this is set back into the site and is screened by existing trees. Officers consider that the retention of the significant trees within the site would give the site more of an established feel and would provide the proposed hotel with a landscaped setting.

A soft landscape scheme has been submitted for consideration. The focus of the submitted scheme is the planting of large specimen trees within the square in order to provide significant trees in the locality in the long term. Officers are agreeable to this approach.

7. Residential Amenity

Having regard to the existing depot use of the site, officers have no objection to the site being used for commercial purposes. The hotel is situated away from the residential properties on Brougham Hayes and, therefore, raises no issues. The pavilion, however, is situated directly opposite residential properties. As stated earlier in this report, the elevation of the pavilion facing Brougham Hayes has significantly less glazing than the other elevations in order to maintain levels of privacy for nearby residents and would not be significantly increased in scale. Also, and in accordance with a report on A3 uses (Pubs, Wine Bars and Restaurants) considered by the meeting of the Planning Transportation & Environment Committee on 27th November 1997, an operational statement for the proposed use of the pavilion has been submitted. This statement describes the use as a "family orientated restaurant with bar". The statement requires refining and, along with other details required by the 1997 report, will be the subject of a condition. In general, officers are satisfied that the proposed uses can operate without detriment to the amenities of local residents.

8. Western Riverside Implications

Recently, there have been two key events that have firmed up the Council's approach towards Western Riverside, and these have implications for the determination of this planning application.

Firstly, the Joint Strategic Planning & Transportation Committee, on behalf of the four constituent Unitary Authorities within the former Avon area, has resolved to adopt the Joint Replacement Structure Plan, as modified. This decision has the effect of giving considerable weight to the policies contained within the Plan, particularly in this case those concerning development within Bath and sustainable transport measures. The new Structure Plan policy framework is in accordance with the Government's approach to developing integrated transport solutions and it is in line with the Council's Provisional Local Transport Plan.

Secondly, the Council's Strategy Committee has accepted the outputs from the considerable work done to date regarding Western Riverside and has resolved to prepare planning policy guidance for the "core" regeneration site and the adjoining area. The application site lies immediately adjacent to the core site and is classed as being within the adjoining area. The wider area has been included to ensure that the overall potential of Western Riverside is not prejudiced by piecemeal development and that, where appropriate, new development schemes contribute to the provision of infrastructure required in order to secure the regeneration of the whole area.

The result of these events is that the Council is reviewing the policy position with regard to the overall issue and the likely impacts that developments such as the current application would have. The Council has appointed consultants to undertake such a review, and also to look at the development and implementation of a mechanism for contributions to transportation infrastructure. The consultants have been asked to report back within a tight timetable and, whilst their report was not available at the time of drafting this report, it is anticipated that the report will be received and considered prior to the sub-committee meeting. An update report will be produced for Members prior to the meeting, advising them of the implications of this issue for this application. If a financial contribution were considered to be appropriate, this would have to be secured through a Section 106 Agreement.

CONCLUSION

Officers have no objections to the principle of a hotel and public house/restaurant on this site and consider that the development would help to open up the site to the public, creating an attractive new public area. The proposed development would not have a material effect on the local road network or general conditions of highway safety. The design approach adopted is modern, however, it respects the setting of the nearby listed terrace of Brougham Hayes, and the overall scale and mass is considered appropriate. The scheme retains the most significant trees at the site and new planting proposals would provide for additional significant trees in the long-term. Finally, the requirement for this proposal to make a financial contribution to transport infrastructure relating to the Western Riverside area is still under consideration, however, an update report concerning this issue will be produced prior to the sub-committee meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to PERMIT subject to the consideration of the consultants' report on the relationship of this site to the Western Riverside and subject to the following conditions:

1 No development shall be commenced until a hard and soft landscape scheme has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting which are to be retained; details of new walls, fences and other boundary treatment and finished ground levels; a planting specification to include numbers, density, size, species and positions of all new trees and shrubs; details of the surface treatment of the open parts of the site; and a programme of implementation.

REASON: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

2 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

3 No site works or clearance shall be commenced until protective fences which conform with British Standard 5837:1991 have been erected around any existing trees and other existing or proposed landscape areas in positions which have previously been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Until the development has been completed these fences shall not be removed and the protected areas are to be kept clear of any building, plant, material, debris and trenching, with the existing ground levels maintained, and there shall be no entry to those areas except for arboricultural or landscape works.

REASON: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

4 Prior to the commencement of any form of site works or clearance the Local Planning Authority shall be given not less than two weeks notice in writing of these works to ensure that appropriate measures of landscape protection required under condition 3 have been implemented in accordance with the approved plans or conditions.

REASON: To ensure that adequate protection is given to the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

5 No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes, and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

6 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commenced until provision has been made within the site in accordance with the approved plan(s) for the (a) parking, (b) turning, (c) loading and (d) unloading of vehicles, and such area(s) shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles associated with the development.

REASON: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

7 No goods, materials, finished or unfinished products or parts, crates or refuse shall be stacked or stored outside any building on the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the development and the amenities of the area.

8 The first floor accommodation proposed in the Pavilion building shall only be used in association with and ancillary to the approved Class A3 use of the building and for no other purpose without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In order to ensure that there is sufficient on-site parking in the interests of highway safety

9 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the uses commenced until details of the vehicular access into the site have been submitted, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and fully implemented.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

10 The parking facilities hereby approved shall be provided on a communal basis and shall not be allocated to individual uses at the site.

REASON: In order to ensure that there is sufficient on-site parking in the interests of highway safety.

11 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the uses commenced until the pedestrian access from Lower Bristol Road has been provided in accordance with the approved plans. The pedestrian access shall be maintained thereafter.

REASON: In order to ensure provision of satisfactory pedestrian access into the site.

12 Any works to trees within the protective fencing shall be carried out prior to the commencement of development and shall be in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

13 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the uses commenced until operational statements relating to the approved uses have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The statements shall include matters such as refuse storage and collection arrangements, delivery and servicing arrangements, hours of opening, capacity, and food / drink balance. The uses shall take place in accordance with the approved statements unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In order to establish and control the precise nature of the uses proposed, in the interests of residential amenity.

14 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the uses commenced until details of ventilation and extraction arrangements have been submitted, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and fully implemented.

REASON: In the interests of residential amenity.

15 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the uses commenced until details noise attenuation measures have been submitted, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and fully implemented.

REASON: In the interests of residential amenity.

16 The classroom unit hereby approved shall be removed from the site before 31st December 2003 and the land restored in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development.

17 The development hereby approved shall not be commenced until a scheme of de-contamination has been submitted to, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and fully implemented.

REASON: In order to prevent future contamination of soil and groundwater.

18 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the uses commenced until a scheme of external lighting has been submitted, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and fully implemented.

REASON: In the interests of residential amenity and highway safety.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01214/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 11th Feb 2000

WARD Abbey

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Great Western Ltd

PROPOSAL: Erection of 6 no. dwellings

SITE LOCATION: Great Western Antiques Centre St Andrews Terrace Bath BA1 2QR

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

This application relates to a cleared site to the north of the City Centre at the interface of the Central Shopping Area to the south and the Georgian residential development to the north.

It is proposed to erect a terrace of six dwellings, five three bedroomed and one two bedroomed, fronting St Andrews Terrace. The terrace is neo classical in design, to be constructed of natural Bathstone, with render to the rear under a lead and slate roof. Five of the proposed dwellings are to have enclosed rear courtyard gardens, out corner dwelling would have no outdoor amenity space. No off street parking would be provided.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Building Control Services - no objections.

Private Sector Renewal - no objections in principle subject to the provision of ventilation in the lower bedroom.

Engineering Services - no highway objection, the proposed residential use in this location will not generate any more traffic than the former antiques use.

Bath Preservation Trust - consider that this latest application for housing on this site is a great improvement on the last scheme. However emphasise the need for high quality building materials "ashlar to the front and at least rubble stone to the rear elevation" and particular regard being given to detailing.

Historic Buildings - following revisions - no objections although it is considered that the windows at first floor should be a four pane sash design and that the dies on the parapet should be removed in order to simplify the overall design.

Councillor Wilmington has requested that this application is reported to the Sub Committee as he considers it to be an important redevelopment in the heart of the Conservation Area.

Neighbours - three letters have been received which raise concern regarding the proposal on the following grounds:-

the visual impact of the height and bulk of the proposed dwellings within the conservation area and the impact upon residents of Alfred Street in terms of loss of privacy and an increased sense of enclosure; smaller scale houses would be far more affordable for young couples wishing to live near the centre; the proposed design is one of Georgian pastiche, a building of its time would be more appropriate not "some historicist nostalgia"; lack of parking will exacerbate the already very congested parking space in the vicinity; the proposal is contrary to policies H13, C6, C13, C14 and C15 of the adopted Bath Local Plan; access, storage of materials, noise and hours of working during construction will be problematic; permission should not be granted until the Party Wall Act agreement has been agreed.

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History

August 1994 - Planning permission was granted for the erection of a two storey building fronting St Andrews Terrace containing offices and two self contained flats. (Local Planning Authority Ref 9865-15).

August 1994 – Conservation Area Consent for the Demolition of the existing buildings on the site was given.

October 1995 - Planning permission was granted for the erection of a two - storey office building. Essentially revisions to the previous approval. (Local Planning Authority Ref 9865-17).

September 1999 - A planning application for the erection of 6 three storey dwellings was withdrawn, following adverse comments in respect of the proposal by Council officers.

Planning Issues and Relevant Policies

Impact, in terms of the proposed use, scale and design upon the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area - Policies H13, C1-C4 inclusive.

Impact upon the setting of adjoining listed buildings - Policies C11-C13 inclusive.

Impact upon the general amenities currently enjoyed by local residents - Policies H13 & H15.

Planning Considerations

1 and 2 Impact upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the setting of adjoining listed buildings.

The application site is located on the northern fringe of an area characterised by a mix of residential, commercial and leisure uses. Whilst this proposal results in the loss of a commercial use it is considered that the proposed residential use does not disrupt this vital mix and relates to the predominately Georgian residential development to the north.

The proposed dwellings front St Andrews Terrace and part of Miles Buildings and comprise two floors with a lower basement. The four storey plus basement Georgian Terrace which fronts Alfred Street towers behind. In view of the site levels the proposed dwellings are two storey fronting St Andrews Terrace and three storey to the rear. Following negotiations with the applicants the height of the proposal has been marginally reduced. From street level the dwellings now have a height to the parapet of some 8.1 metres and 8.9 metres to the ridge, they are some 10.6 metres in depth. By way of comparison the main frontage building which previously occupied the site, which has recently been demolished, was some 5.3 metres in height to the parapet and some 6.2 metres in height to the ridge. Whilst it is recognised that the proposal is higher it is considered that it continues to be sympathetic in terms of scale to the street scene and the locality as a whole.

In terms of detailed design, the proposal is neo classical in its approach. The terrace is to incorporate end pavilions, the pilasters of which project forward by approximately 10 cm. Traditional Georgian sash windows are proposed at first floor level above casement French windows on the main reception floor. Natural Bathstone is proposed to the front and sides of the development and render to the rear, under a slate and lead roof. Amendments have been sought in order to simplify the proposal. It has been the opinion of officers that the site does not warrant a "grand" design, rather one that is simple/subservient, particularly with regard to the Georgian terrace to the rear. The submitted revisions still retain the end pavilions but otherwise the proposals have been simplified. It is now considered that such revisions are acceptable in design terms and do not harm therefore the character and appearance of this part of the Bath Conservation Area.

A number of listed buildings surround the site, notably the Georgian terrace to the rear (Grade II). In light of the above comments in respect of the siting, design and external detailing it is considered that the proposal will not have an adverse impact upon their setting.

3. Impact upon the Amenities of Adjoining Properties

The building fronting St Andrews Terrace which previously occupied the site (which has recently been demolished under a previous consent in 1994) was some 5.3 metres in height to the parapet and some 6.2 metres in height to the ridge from ground floor level. Attached and to the rear, the building continued right up to the rear boundary of the site, adjacent to the rear boundaries of the basement flats of no's 14 & 15 Alfred Street, the ridge height at this point being some 5.4 metres, also measured from ground floor level.

Whilst it is recognised that the proposed development is some 3 to 4 metres higher than the original building it is however sited some 8.3 metres from the rear boundaries of Alfred Terrace, and the courtyard gardens of the proposed dwellings act as a buffer. It is considered that the occupiers of the basement flats of no's 14 & 15 Alfred Street, which were previously severely enclosed will benefit from such a proposal. Instead of a 5.4 metre high building abutting their boundary, it is now proposed to erect a 2 metre high wall. In terms of the relationship of the proposal with the ground floor flats of Alfred Street it is considered that this distance of 8.3 metres is sufficient and will not result in a sense of enclosure or loss of light which would warrant a refusal of the overall scheme.

Balconies are proposed to the rear of the dwellings. They are 0.8 metres in width and will act primarily as an access to the courtyard gardens below. Bedrooms are proposed at the rear of the dwellings at first floor. Whilst it is inevitable that in this relatively confined city centre location there will be a degree of overlooking it is considered that in light of the above this will be kept to within acceptable limits.

One letter of objection raised concern with regard to the impact of such upon the rear wall of no. 17, St Andrews terrace which has now been left exposed following demolition of the existing building and makes reference to the Party Wall etc Act 1996.

Members will be aware that this Act, which came into force on the 1st July 1997, is separate from both planning and building regulation legislation and does not prevent the determination of this application.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

1 No development shall commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs and boundary walls, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

2 Areas of the external walls shown on the submitted drawings to be rendered shall be rendered a colour and texture which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work commences.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

3 Prior to the commencement of development, a sample panel of all external walling materials to be used shall be erected on site, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and kept on site for reference until the development is completed.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

4 No development shall commence until further details of the coursing and jointing of the external walls, including the boundary walls, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved.

REASON: In the interests of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

5 No development shall commence until all moulding details of the masonry elements hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved.

REASON: In the interests of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

6 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no garages or other free standing buildings shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling(s) hereby approved, other than those expressly authorised by this permission, without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: The introduction of further curtilage buildings requires detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority to safeguard the appearance of the development and the amenities of the surrounding area.

7 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), there shall be no enlargement or external alteration to any building(s) hereby approved without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and of the amenity and character of the area.

8 No development shall commence until a detailed method statement in respect of the construction works required to implement the development, to include details of the storage of materials, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction works shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved

REASON: In the interests of the amenity of adjoining occupiers.

9 Notwithstanding condition 08 above, no works or deliveries required to implement this development shall take place outside the hours of 0730 to 1800 hours each day Monday to Friday. No such works or deliveries shall take place on Saturdays or Sundays.

REASON: In the interests of the amenity of adjoining occupiers.

10 No development shall be commenced until a hard and soft landscape scheme has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting which are to be retained; details of new walls, fences and other boundary treatment and finished ground levels; a planting specification to include numbers, density, size, species and positions of all new trees and shrubs; details of the surface treatment of the open parts of the site; and a programme of implementation.

REASON: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

11 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

ADVICE NOTE:

It is noted that the development hereby approved involves the construction on and close to boundaries with adjoining properties. The applicant is advised that this planning permission does not convey any other consent which may be required from the adjoining landowner or any other person, or which may be required under any other enactment or obligation. Particular attention is drawn to the Party Wall etc Act 1996.

FOOTNOTE: This permission relates to drawing no’s SA/P/01/02/03/04/05/06A/07B /08B/09/10A/11/12/13.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 98/01027/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 26th Jan 1999

WARD Newbridge

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Greenbelt Public Right of Way

APPLICANT: Minerva Bath Rowing Club

PROPOSAL: Erection of a boathouse and pavilion (Revised proposal)

SITE LOCATION: Land Adjoining The Boathouse Newbridge Road Bath BA1 3JX

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The site of application is situated on adjacent land to the north and east of The Boathouse Public House on the western outskirts of the City and lies north-west of the Newbridge Park and Ride site. The site comprises 0.2 hectares of open land including a lawned area next to the garden/children's activity area attached to The Boathouse Public House, part of a former landfill area (now a grassy plateau with a gentle bank running northwards within the centre of the site) and a sliver of land forming part of a roughly grassed field terminating at the north-western boundary of the Newbridge Park and Ride. The western boundary of the site comprises the existing bank of the River Avon and, on the southern edge, an existing small slipway for boats.

A public footpath crosses diagonally south east to north west through the site and there is an existing mature willow tree in the northernmost part of the site. A public footpath runs along the opposite river bank to the site. There is no existing surfaced vehicular access to the site, which also has no road frontage.

It is proposed to erect a boathouse and a pavilion and install a new solid oak stepped water entry pontoon some 19 metres long along the adjacent river bank. The two buildings would be sited some 28 metres back from the river bank with a slightly undulating grass apron in between comprising some filling of the existing ground levels. The proposed boathouse measures 30 metres long and is 18 metres wide at its widest extent and some 4.5 metres high. Some 21 metres of the length of the boathouse (used for boat storage) would be covered by a green roof garden comprising soil and planting to reflect the natural habitat and this part of the building would therefore be below ground.

The above ground western end of the proposed boathouse would have a hipped end slate roof and Bath ashlar cladding with continuous clerestorey glazing and glazed timber doors in three sliding folding panels. The boathouse would have a storage capacity for up to 28 boats of various sizes. The above ground part of the boathouse would accommodate toilets and locker rooms. A 3-4 metre high retaining wall would be constructed at the rear of the above ground boathouse and pavilion to retain the re-formed landfill escarpment.

The proposed pavilion building would be sited some 3 metres south of the boathouse and would measure 7.6 metres square and 4.5 metres high to the apex of the pyramidal roof and would be wholly above ground. The pavilion would have more extensive vertical glazing in green oak frames but would otherwise be constructed in similar external materials to the above-ground boathouse. The pavilion would house a meeting room, kitchen and toilets, for use by the Applicants.

A 2.5 metre wide access track would be formed linking the pavilion and boathouse to Newbridge Road, via the Newbridge Park and Ride site. The access route would pass through the existing metal bar gate and would be routed round the rear of The Boathouse public house. The track would be constructed of Cotswold stone chippings dressed into the tarmacadam access drive. The track, because of the sloping ground, would be excavated into the existing ground by a maximum of 800 millimetres.

Demountable bollards are proposed at the northern (pavilion) end of the access drive to restrict unauthorised vehicle access to the boat house assembly apron. The access track from the Park and Ride site would be used only for occasional vehicle site access. A cycle rack for housing 12 cycles is proposed. Hard and soft landscape design details have been submitted with the proposal.

Details have been submitted of a proposed diversion of the existing footpath crossing the site some 20 metres north of the existing route for a length of 60 metres to avoid increased gradients next to and over the proposed boathouse.

A Design Report has been submitted with the application which refers, inter alia, to the following:

- the building size for storing rowing equipment is governed by the 9-18 metre length of rowing boats.

- only one operational and two disability parking bays are required on site close to the new clubhouse.

- weekday evening use of the rowing centre will utilise off-peak Park & Ride capacity when the Park and Ride is largely empty.

- on Saturdays and Sundays when the Park and Ride is full, rowers will need alternative parking for in the region of 20 cars. During this period visitors will park in the empty Brassmill Lane Industrial park and walk along the towpath to the Clubhouse.

- the proposals would provide rowing opportunities otherwise denied to members of the community e.g schools, the physically disadvantaged and the actively retired.

- it is envisaged that Minerva and The Royal Navy Rowing Clubs and local schools will use the new facilities.

- principal activities will include river rowing, river craft and briefing seminars, club administration, one annual Head of River Race and one annual Regatta.

- rowing times are:

January – March Weekends 0900 - 1200 hours

April – August Weekdays 1800 - 2100 hours

Weekends 0900 - 1200 hours

September Nil

October – December Weekends 0900 - 1200 hours plus a limited number of junior rowers may visit the centre during school hours.

- number of potential rowers are:

weekends: 67

or weekdays 2 or 3 evenings: 42

weekdays 2 or 3 afternoons: 15

- included within the supporting statement submitted with the application are letters from the Amateur Rowing Association, Royal Navy and Royal Marine Amateur Rowing Association, Royal National Institute for Deaf People, Beechen Cliff School, The Royal School, Hayesfield School, St Mark's School, King Edward's School, Oldfield School and Bath High School.

- the advantages and disadvantages of rowing opportunities on other parts of the River Avon are reviewed.

- Minerva Rowing Club currently operate from their present site off Tollbridge Road, Batheaston which offers only basic facilities.

A report on the ecological implications of the proposal has been submitted.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

(The application was advertised as a departure from the Development Plan and as affecting a public right of way)

British Waterways: do not wish to make any comments.

Wessex Water: details of good drainage and water supply connections would need to be agreed at detailed design stage. Surface water disposal needs to be agreed by Bath & North East Somerset Council.

Environment Agency: no objection in principle subject to conditions concerning compensatory flood storage works and internal floor levels and informatives regarding the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Bye Laws. There are no water quality objections provided foul drainage is connected to the mains drainage system.

Environment Agency (further letter): confirm that the finished floor levels of 16.6 metres AOD for the pavilion and 16.225 metres for the boathouse are acceptable to the Agency.

Highway Development Officer: the use of the Newbridge Park and Ride site for off-site parking is unacceptable as it is specifically designed to provide parking for commuters, shoppers and leisure users to the City centre and is part of the Authority's parking strategy. This Park and Ride is currently at near capacity, therefore required spaces for weekend use will displace above users of the site.

The hours of operation of the Park and Ride site do not suit the hours of operation of the rowing club. Currently the Newbridge Park and Ride operates to 1900 hours whereas the rowing club's evening use extends to 2100 hours.

Sport England: the proposed development would result in an improved level of sport and recreation provision in the area and "Sport England" (the brand name of the English Sports Council) would therefore wish to lend its strong support IN PRINCIPLE to this planning application. Sport England makes the following comments:-

1. This support is offered within the context of our Land Use Planning Policy Statement – Consultation Draft (January 1999).

2. We feel that the proposed development for a new rowing centre at this site will improve access for the sport of rowing to the natural environment of the River Avon. In addition, due to the building's design and location in relation to the Park and Ride facilities it will also meet the objectives of sustainable development with regard to travel and building design.

3. We consider that the applicant has made a thorough assessment of alternative sites for this facility within the catchment area and that this site offers the most appropriate location for the development of rowing, as also supported by the Amateur Rowing Association. We consider that the applicant is seeking to ensure that the proposed building is of minimal visual impact on the Green Belt and AONB and therefore is in line with the recommendation of the relevant Sport England policy.

4. We consider that this site has much to offer to the development of the sport of rowing for the community of Bath. The club is committed to full community involvement and to ensuring that the club can be a partner in agreeing management practice to minimise any environmental impact.

5. Support for this application in the context of the Town and Country Planning Acts does not in any way imply or commit English Sports Council support for any related application to the Lottery Sports Fund.

Ecological Officer: The local ecological appraisal does identify the main impacts of this scheme. Subject to the details of scheme implementation, these impacts are not considered to be significant in the context of the River Avon Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) or the adjacent grassland SNCI and it should be possible to secure conditions through a Section 106 agreement that will minimise and offset ecological impacts.

A Section 106 agreement should secure the following:

(i) details of grassland habitat protection to be submitted and agreed prior to development;

(ii) details of top soil stripping, storage and re-use to be submitted and agreed prior to development;

(iii) details of habitat creation to be submitted and agreed prior to development, to include objectives; locations; species composition and management prescriptions.

Landscape Officer: refers, inter alia, to the following:

1. The orientation of the building to the west would visually relate it more closely to the river, reduce the extent of earthworks and is more likely to provide opportunity for setting the building naturally into the existing topography. However it is accepted that this is not likely to be achievable given the constraints of the site and the operational requirements.

2. A change of ground level is proposed to the south of the proposed track through an area of retained vegetation; the practicality and details for achieving this needs to be demonstrated.

3. If approved, appropriate landscape conditions are recommended.

Agent for the applicants and Development Officer for Minerva Bath Rowing Club: several letters and representations have been received referring, inter alia, to the following:

1. The proposal accords with the positive use of Green Belt Land in that it provides opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation near urban areas and provides essential recreational facilities.

2. It is not the intention of the applicant that Club parking should occur on the Park and Ride site of The Boathouse Restaurant Car Park; the applicant has made provision to use 20 parking spaces at the Brassmill Lane Industrial Park (Roper Rhodes Ltd).

3. Club parking at Newbridge would be in sharp contrast to the present arrangement at Bathampton where the Club rely entirely on public classified roads for parking;

4. River users find no inconvenience in walking substantial distances to fish or row from the right spot.

5. Abuse of The Boathouse Public House Car Park would not be tolerated by the Minerva Rowing Club Executive.

6. Sharing rowing facilities with the Rowing Club at Saltford is not a viable option because:

(i) the costs at Saltford in bringing the infrastructure, roadway services etc. to an acceptable standard are prohibitive.

(ii) the land is owned by the Duchy of Cornwall and occupied on an unsecured lease. Financial grants for such leases are not available, which makes it virtually impossible to fund the long term development and investment needed to provide suitable buildings etc.

(iii) in our view Highway Safety would mitigate strongly against an increase in traffic flow onto the site, because of the very dangerous turn from the A4 travelling in a westerly direction.

(iv) access by bicycle or public transport from Bath to the Saltford site is extremely difficult.

7. On safety grounds it is sensible to spread facilities along the river, because congestion at entry and exit when boats become unstable, increases the potential for accidental conflict.

8. Should the application not be supported by the Council, this would effectively mean the end of significantly improved rowing facilities in Bath.

Avon Wildlife Trust: concerned that the proposed development will cause damage to the Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCIs). The calcareous grassland, trees and scrub within the SNCIs provide valuable habitats for birds and invertebrates and therefore any loss would be detrimental to wildlife. We object to this development and would urge your Council to refuse permission.

Avon Wildlife Trust (further letter): we have recently been informed that the site holds a colony of glow-worms. This insect is restricted to a limited number of sites in the former Avon County on good quality limestone grassland and serves to underline the quality of the grassland concerned. We would again urge the Council to refuse this application which would clearly be contrary to policies in both the Avon County Structure Plan and Bath Local Plan.

The Bath Society: In the Green Belt. It is a long walk from the weekend parking.

Other third party objections: Objections have been received from the House Manager of The Boathouse, local residents, members and representatives of local Angling Associations, Avon County Rowing Club and Saltford Marina Cruising Club.

These objectors refer to the following grounds of objection:

(i) closure of the public path/right of way which is a heavily used path in an area of exceptional natural beauty;

(ii) proposal would result in extensive over-use of the River Avon in that area and have a detrimental effect on the natural environment.

(iii) this part of the river is already well frequented by other sports and casual users including established rowing clubs, motorised pleasure craft and occasional pleasure rowing-boats; the problems are at their worst in the summer months and any extra boat traffic could increase the probability of accidents and would result in increased congestion.

(iv) increased disturbance to anglers

(v) increased bank erosion and damage to ecology of the river

(vi) increased boat activity ruins match fishing along the river

(vii) concern over appropriate screening of the boat house from the children's play area related to the Public House.

(viii) the car park to The Boathouse will suffer from continued abuse.

(ix) concern that the earliest access time of 0900 hours is adhered to in order that staff and managers (in The Boathouse) do not suffer from noise and disturbance.

(x) with four rowing clubs already boating from Saltford, the proposal will present problems for all river users with upstream rowers conflicting with downstream rowers.

(xi) this particular field and indeed the swathe of countryside beyond it should be spared; it supports a mix of relatively undisturbed natural meadow, shrub and trees and in particular the site has breeding colonies of glow-worms.

(xii) increased disturbance and activity would destroy the remaining pocket of nature.

Third Party Supporters: Letters of support have been received from interested persons, English Federation of Disability Sport (South West), ARZV Rowing Club (from Alkmaar, Holland), the Minerva Bath Rowing Club President and Bath Building Society.

These supporters refer to the following:

(i) the Club caters for school children to older adults

(ii)the planned facility will offer disabled people the opportunity to attend and fully participate in rowing in Bath

(iii) the exchange programme with ARZV Rowing Club will be improved

(iv) competitive rowers need the better water and facilities to reach their potential and the improved site and accessibility encourages more recreational rowing, including rowing for the disabled

(v) current facilities on offer are below standard and, if Bath is to excel in rowing, as it does in so many other sports, the proposed Centre is essential

(vi) Newbridge is already associated with water facilities and the area and therefore officers an ideal location. Public transport is also readily available.

(vii) Bath needs more community based activities encouraging young people to partake in physical exercise; something that is sadly lacking at local school level;

(viii) Minerva are succeeding in introducing newcomers from a range of different backgrounds

(ix) Bath has much rowing talent but the City is severely lacking suitable facilities for enthusiasts to progress to National level.

(x) alternative sites on the river seem to be unsuitable in a variety of different ways because youngsters need access by public transport, women need to be safe in the evenings and the site needs to be reasonably close to the public to minimise the potential of vandalism.

PLANNING ISSUES

Planning Policy

The site of application lies within the Green Belt and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. A small part of the north-eastern fringe of the site appears to lie within a protected wildlife site, the boundary of which is not clearly defined on the Bath Local Plan (Proposals Map).

Until the Joint Replacement Structure Plan (JRSP) is adopted, the statutory Development Plan covering the site comprises the Avon County Structure Plan (ACSP) and Bath Local Plan.

The JRSP, which the Council is intending to adopt shortly, is a material consideration which needs to be accorded considerable weight as advised in PPG1 (General Policy and Principles).

Green Belt

Policy GB6 of the ACSP relates to the Green Belt, and resists the construction of new buildings for purposes other than, inter alia, outdoor recreation.

Policy GB1 of the Bath Local Plan relates to the Green Belt and resists the construction of new buildings other than, inter alia, for essential facilities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation.

Policy GB1 of the Bath Local Plan is echoed in Government advice on Green Belt, contained in Planning Policy Guidance Note 2 (PPG2). This Guidance states that 'essential facilities should be genuinely required for uses of land which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in it. Possible examples of such facilities include small changing rooms or unobstructive spectator accommodation for outdoor sport or small stables for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation'.

In relation to this, PPG2 refers to five purposes of including land in the Green Belt and two of these purposes are considered particularly relevant in the context of this application, i.e. to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns.

Once Green Belts have been defined PPG2 advises that Green Belts have a positive role to play in providing, inter alia, opportunities for outdoor sport and outdoor recreation near urban areas; to retain attractive landscapes and enhance landscapes near to where people live and to secure nature conservation interests.

PPG2 also advises that the visual amenities of the Green Belt should not be injured by proposals by reason of their siting, materials or design.

Policy 16 of the JRSP intended to be adopted seeks to retain the openness of Green Belts and reiterates the positive use of land by allowing appropriate opportunities for outdoor sport and recreation new urban areas.

Policy 43 of the JRSP states that new facilities will be located in the open countryside or the Green Belt only when related to appropriate outdoor recreation activities.

Area Of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)

Policy C8 of the ACSP seeks to conserve the scenic qualities of the AONB by generally restricting the location and scale of development and resists development in the open countryside unless it is essential to the rural economy or desirable for the enjoyment of the amenities of the area.

Policy L1 of the Bath Local Plan resists developments in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty which have a detrimental impact on the landscape character or appearance of the area.

Sport/Recreation

Policy RC.14 of the ACSP sets criteria for permitting the provision of recreation and sports facilities including: the proposals complement the existing pattern of recreation facilities; meet the needs of residents for a range of sporting and recreational opportunities; the recreation supporting capacity of the location is demonstrated in terms of its impact upon the landscape, ecology, local inhabitants and works, acceptable access and adequate drainage.

Policy LR2 of the Bath Local Plan gives favourable consideration to proposals for recreational development only where they do not detract from the character of the area or its wildlife value and respect residential amenities.

Nature Conservation

Policy L15 of the Bath Local Plan seeks to safeguard sites of wildlife importance.

Public Rights Of Way

Policy RC.9 of the ACSP states that development proposals which detrimentally affect the recreational use or amenity of an existing footpath route, normally will be permitted only when suitable provision for its diversion has been made.

Other Policies in the Development Plan

Other policies in the ACSP and Bath Local Plan referring to access, transport, and the World Heritage Site, residential amenity, and landscape character are relevant.

JRSP - other Policies

Policy 1 (sustainable development) – seeks to conserve green field land respecting and enhancing landscape character and protecting the countryside from inappropriate development.

Policy 45 refers to sports that require a rural location and states that the permission of facilities will need to safeguard the environment and amenity and character of rural areas, facilitate access by all groups in the community and minimise the need to travel.

Relevant Planning History

An application for a similar development was withdrawn on 30th November 1998 (ref 98/00459/FUL).

Environmental Impact Assessment

At the time of receipt of the application (December 1998) it was considered that under the relevant Regulations operating at the time the proposals were not of a scale or nature to warrant an Environmental Impact Assessment. Whilst the Regulations have subsequently been revised, the new Regulations do not apply to applications submitted before 14 March 1999.

Planning Comments - Green Belt Issue

Whilst there is an existing slipway from the site to the River Avon, the site of application is open and is not used for any intensive sporting or recreational activity. Indeed such uses are precluded because of the lack of adequate access to the site. Therefore the proposal is in effect to introduce substantial buildings (albeit part underground) and change the use of the open informal lawned area to formal sporting/recreational use.

Given the size of the buildings proposed and the fact that there is no established rowing club use of the site and having regard to the examples of "essential facilities" referred to in PPG2 it is considered that the proposed buildings would not constitute appropriate development in the Green Belt. The applicants argue that the provision of a boathouse and pavilion to provide boat storage, changing rooms and pavilion are essential to serve the purposes and ambitions of the rowing club but it is considered that the scope of the proposed built facilities on this open site not used for such intense or formal sporting activities goes beyond, as a matter of degree, what could reasonably be considered as 'essential' and beyond the examples of essential facilities referred to in PPG2.

The proposed use and development should also preserve the 'openness' of the Green Belt as advised in PPG2. Whilst the applicants have gone to considerable lengths to landscape the area and minimise vehicle parking on the open part of the site and to underground the boathouse, the proposed above ground buildings would still be visible particularly from the opposite river bank and it is considered that the openness of the Green Belt would not be preserved by the proposals.

Whilst the positive aspect of this proposal in providing an opportunity for outdoor sport and recreation in the Green Belt is acknowledged, overall the proposal is considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt for the reasons referred to above.

Therefore in accordance with Government advice in PPG2 special circumstances would have to be demonstrated to warrant an exception to Green Belt policy and to allow the application to be permitted.

Planning Comments - Landscape Character/Visual Amenity

The site and surroundings forming part of the AONB are attractive open and rural in character and therefore the landscape design approach in this environmentally sensitive area requires careful consideration.

The applicant has confirmed that the vegetation along the edge of the approach drive will be retained and that the river bank edge will be retained and supported by laying a coir fibre blanket with jute reinforcement which will cope with changes in water level, scouring from boats and allow roots to penetrate the mesh.

The apron fronting the buildings would comprise reinforced turf, the existing prominent willow tree would be retained and tree and shrub planting is proposed around the apron and river edge and above the buildings. The proposed extensive retaining walls, retaining the bank round the buildings would be screened in parts by planting and the proposed buildings.

Parking at the site would be restricted to one operational parking bay and two disability parking bays secured by landscaping.

A permanent green roof garden is proposed to cover the main boat storage building; the earth specification and planting schedule will reflect the need for a low maintenance covering with the same climatic response as the natural habitat.

The proposed access track linking the site to the Park and Ride site would need to be engineered by some cut and fill into the existing topography and will be most visible looking northwards from the Park and Ride, but will be screened from riverside views looking east by existing vegetation.

Notwithstanding the issue of the openness of the Green Belt and concerns over loss of open rural character and appearance it is considered that the landscape design approach to the proposals, (including improvements since the previously withdrawn scheme and undergrounding of the proposed building), subject to conditions, would significantly reduce the visual impact of the proposals in its attractive and environmentally sensitive surroundings.

Ecology/Nature Conservation

Representations have been received concerned about the impact of the proposals on ecological and nature conservation interests including an existing glow-worm habitat. However the Council's Ecological Officer considers that the impacts of the development on the River Avon site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) or the grassland SNCI, would not be significant subject to control by suitable conditions (A section 106 agreement is not considered necessary in this particular case given the limited nature of the development). The further information submitted by the applicants indicates that the proposals would not impinge upon the area within which glow-worms have been sighted in the area and this is accepted.

Footpath Diversion

An objection has been received to the 'closure' of the well-used footpath crossing the site. However the proposals (as revised) propose to divert the existing straight unmarked footpath crossing the site around and some 20 metres east of the existing route which in principle has been agreed by the Council's Public Rights of Way Officer. An Advice Note regarding the need for the Diversion Order to be confirmed and that the existing right of way should not be blocked at any time would be necessary if the proposal is permitted.

Parking/Access

The applicants have submitted evidence of a car parking agreement with Roper Rhodes Ltd of Brassmill Lane Trading estate to allow parking for up to 30 cars. The applicants claim that the rowers would use this facility at peak periods and walk approximately 500-750 metres along the river to the site rather than use The Boathouse public house or Park and Ride car parks. Clearly with access proposed via the Park and Ride Car Park then it would be much more convenient for rowers to park at the Park and Ride site and this would be difficult for the Council to control. However subject to a legal agreement and appropriate conditions to secure adequate off-site parking arrangements and to control the operation of the Club by means of a satisfactory management/operational plan to be submitted and also the scope of the use, it is considered, on balance, that the objections of Engineering Services to over-use or congestion of The Park and Ride site can be overcome.

Design

The design of the proposed above ground buildings incorporating slate roofs, ashlar cladding and timber joinery is in principle considered acceptable subject to conditions controlling details.

Flood Risk/Environment Agency/Wessex Water

Subject to conditions controlling compensatory flood storage and internal floor levels and relevant informative notes the Environment Agency would not object.

Wessex Water have no objections subject to an advice note and control over drainage.

Increased Use of the River

Objections have been received from existing users of the river including anglers, an existing rowing club and existing boat users to the proposed increased use and effects of that increased use on this particular stretch of the river. However in the absence of comments or objections from the agencies controlling the river it is not considered that the increased river traffic would warrant refusal.

Residential Amenity

There are no solely residential properties in the immediate vicinity of the site. A representation has been received from the operators of The Boathouse public house concerned about controlling the earliest operating hour of 0900 hours to limit disturbance to staff and managers residing in the building. The main disturbance would, it is considered, arise from use of the access track running behind the building and a condition restricting traffic movements and activity between midnight and 0800 hours (instead of 0900 hours)is considered reasonable. Otherwise the proposals would not result in a significant reduction in residential amenity.

Illumination

No illumination is included as part of the application. In this rural context within the AONB any illumination, unless carefully controlled, could be visually intrusive. A condition controlling illumination is therefore considered necessary.

Special Circumstances

It is not disputed that the proposed facility, operated by Minerva Rowing Club, would provide a valuable recreational and community resource as supported by Sport England and other interested sporting, educational and disabled groups referred to in the Consultations and Representations section of this report.

However that benefit, on its own, would not be sufficient to constitute special circumstances as other sporting/recreational clubs could claim similar benefits for sites within the Green Belt.

During the early processing of the application officers made it clear that they were of the opinion that special circumstances did not apply in this case and put this to the applicants.

Since then representations have been received from Sport England who consider that the applicant has made a thorough assessment of alternative sites for this facility within the catchment area as also supported by the Amateur Rowing Association and that this site is the most appropriate.

The applicants have also confirmed that the present rowing facilities in the Green Belt at Bathampton (where there are current difficulties over access and facilities) would be removed. This could form the subject of a Section 106 Agreement and would be a particular benefit in this case.

Given the lack of apparent viable sites (including the sharing of the existing rowing club premises at Saltford) as supported by Sport England and the removal of the existing use and substandard facility at Bathampton it is considered that exceptional circumstances do apply in this particular case which would not set a precedent for allowing similar otherwise inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the advice in PPG2, the proposals are considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would impact on the open character of the area. However there are considered to be exceptional circumstances in this particular case which would not set a precedent and which justify exception from the normal operation of Green Belt policy. If Members accept this conclusion then the application would need to be referred to the Secretary of State as a departure from the Development Plan which the Council are minded to permit.

A Section 106 agreement to secure the removal of the existing rowing facility at Bathampton is considered necessary and reasonable in this case. The Agreement will need to deal with appropriate re-instatement of that site.

Whilst the proposals would impact on the open character and appearance of the area the landscape and building design approach is commendable in integrating the design as far as possible into the surroundings.

In relation to other issues and material considerations it is considered that these can be controlled by appropriate conditions and would not override the conclusion on the main issues referred to above.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to PERMIT subject to (1) the Secretary of State not requiring the application to be referred to him for determination and (2) the prior completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the removal of the existing rowing club use and building(s) operated by the applicants at Tollbridge Road, Bathampton and the re-instatement of that site, together with the provision of adequate off-site parking facilities (including the means of minimising use by Club Members of the Park and Ride Car Park) and subject to the following conditions:

1 No development shall be commenced until a hard and soft landscape scheme has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting which are to be retained; details of new walls, fences and other boundary treatment and finished ground levels; a planting specification to include numbers, density, size, species and positions of all new trees and shrubs; details of the surface treatment of the open parts of the site; and a programme of implementation.

REASON: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

2 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

3 No site works or clearance shall be commenced until protective fences which conform with British Standard 5837:1991 have been erected around any existing trees and other existing or proposed landscape areas in positions which have previously been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Until the development has been completed these fences shall not be removed and the protected areas are to be kept clear of any building, plant, material, debris and trenching, with the existing ground levels maintained, and there shall be no entry to those areas except for arboricultural or landscape works.

REASON: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

4 Prior to the commencement of any form of site works or clearance the Local Planning Authority shall be given not less than two weeks notice in writing of these works to ensure that appropriate measures of landscape protection required under condition 3 have been implemented in accordance with the approved plans or conditions.

REASON: To ensure that adequate protection is given to the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

5 The existing trees and hedges shall be retained in accordance with the approved details. The development shall not be commenced unless the identified trees and hedges have been so retained. Any retained tree or hedge which within five years of the approved development being occupied or completed, whichever is the sooner, dies, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced by a similar species of a size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority during the next planting season or in accordance with a programme of replacement to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

6 No works shall commence on site until a survey of the development site as existing has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority concurrently with the submission of the site landscaping drawings and shall include, as appropriate, the following information at a scale not less than 1:100:

(a) location, species, girth or stem diameter, accurate crown spread and reference number of all trees on the site with a stem diameter of 75 mm or greater measured 1.5 m from ground level.

(b) a schedule identifying the condition of the trees referred to in (a) above with proposals for surgery or other works where applicable.

(d) location, species, spread and other relevant details of existing hedges and other areas of vegetation.

(f) existing boundary treatments and forms of enclosure.

(g) existing structures, services and other artefacts, including hard surfaces.

REASON: To allow the proper consideration of the impact of the proposed development on the amenity value of the existing site.

7 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no lines, mains, pipes, cables or other apparatus shall be installed or laid on the site other than in accordance with drawings first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To safeguard the existing and proposed trees, vegetation and open spaces on the site.

8 Prior to the commencement of development, a sample panel of all external walling materials to be used shall be erected on site, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and kept on site for reference until the development is completed.

REASON: In the interests of the character and appearance of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

9 Samples of the roofing materials to be used for the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of the character and appearance of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

10 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commenced until the means of vehicular access has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans, and shall thereafter be retained for access purposes.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

11 The use hereby permitted shall not commence until the parking and turning areas and cycle racks have been provided in accordance with the approved plans and the use shall not operate without the parking and turning areas and cycle racks available for use.

REASON: To provide adequate vehicle and cycle parking.

12 The use hereby permitted shall not commence until details of arrangements for off-site parking and for limiting vehicular access to and parking on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The use shall not operate without the approved parking and access arrangements in place.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety and to limit vehicle parking within the site in the interests of the open character of the area.

13 The use shall not commence until details of foul and surface water drainage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the approved details fully implemented.

REASON: To secure adequate drainage for the site.

14 No illumination shall take place within the site without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the character and appearance of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

15 The use hereby approved shall not be carried on between midnight and 0800 hours on any day.

REASON: To safeguard the amenities of occupiers of The Boathouse Public House.

16 The finished floor level of the Pavilion building hereby permitted shall not be below 16.6 metres AOD and the finished floor level of the Boathouse building shall not be below 16.225 metres AOD.

REASON: To minimise flood risk.

17 No development shall commence until details of a scheme for the provision and implementation of compensatory flood storage works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the use shall not commence unless the approved scheme has been fully implemented.

REASON: To alleviate the increased risk of flooding.

18 No development shall commence until details of a method statement including the following:

(i) grassland habitat protection;

(ii) top soil stripping, storage and re-use;

(iii) habitat creation including objectives, locations, species composition and management; and

(iv) a programme of works

have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To mitigate the ecological impacts of the proposal.

19 The rowing club use of the site and facilities hereby permitted shall not operate other than in accordance with an operational statement and management plan previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and which includes the following:

(i) the range, frequency and duration of proposed uses, events and activities within the site during any calendar year and

(ii) means of minimising parking by Club Members or visitors or other users in the Newbridge Park and Ride.

REASON: The Local Planning Authority wish to control the use and operation of the site in the interests of highway safety.

ADVICE NOTES:

An existing public right of way crosses the site of application. This right of way should remain unobstructed at all times unless a Diversion Order for the right of way has been confirmed and the diverted right of way is in place and open for use.

Wessex Water has advised that the applicants agree with Wessex Water, prior to the commencement of works, a point of connection onto systems operated by Wessex Water.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00934/REG13 TYPE Regulation 13 Application

EXPIRY DATE 26th Nov 1999

WARD Abbey

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: British Heart Foundation

PROPOSAL: External and internal alterations and general refurbishment

SITE LOCATION: 15-16 Northgate Street Bath BA1 5AS

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The building is located on the east side of Northgate Street between Slippery Lane and Bridge Street. It is a grade II listed building located in an important central location within the Bath Conservation Area. The building is also located very close to the line of the original City Wall and North Gate of the Roman/ Mediaeval walled City. The building appears to comprise a (possibly eighteenth century) street frontage building which is linked to a lower, and probably earlier building to the rear (east) and fronting Slippery Lane. Both original buildings have been significantly modified and joined together. Much of the original plan form at basement, ground and first floor has been lost and much opening up appears to have taken place at each floor. Notwithstanding this, there is evidence of various stages of the history within the interior of the building.

It is proposed to carry out a significant refurbishment of 15 Northgate Street at basement, ground and first floor levels. This will involve the removal of two existing staircases; the provision of a new stairwell providing access to all three floors and providing attached toilet and kitchen accommodation; the provision of a new access from Slippery Lane; the demolition of various lower roof structures and a link corridor over the ground floor and their replacement by a new lead-covered flat roof; the provision of amended and additional drainage runs in basement floors; and various other minor alterations. It is also proposed to remove a cantilevered wc from the first floor rear of 16 Northgate Street and to relocate the wc at second floor level.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

No adverse comments have been received from consultees.

No representations have been received.

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History: None.

Local Plan Policies: Policies C1, C2, C3, C4, C11, C12, C13 and C15 of the Bath Local Plan are relevant to the determination of this application.

Character and Setting of Listed Building:

The majority of the works affect the character of the listed building and particularly the interior of the listed building. Considering the strong archaeological interest of the building's proximity to the line of the original city wall and Northgate, and evidence of the connected buildings' former history, it is considered necessary to ensure that an archaeological and historical study of the building should be produced to enable the decision maker to understand more readily the history and character of the existing building. Until such a study has been produced, it is difficult to assess accurately the effect the proposed works would have on the character of the listed building.

An historical and archaeological study is currently being undertaken on behalf of the Council to enable the character and archaeological importance of the building to be understood better. On receipt of this study, it will be possible to assess fully the impact of the proposed works.

Character and Appearance of this part of the Conservation Area:

Works to the exterior of the building are minimal in this application as they either affect the elevation to the narrow Slippery Lane or the rear elevation and lower roofscape of the building which cannot be seen readily from any public views.

Reason for Application being Reported to Committee:

The Council cannot determine its own applications for listed building consent. Members are being asked to consider whether they wish to support the submission of this application to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions for determination.

CONCLUSION

The proper consideration of this application can only be carried out after the provision of an historical and archaeological study of the building. Officers are currently awaiting the completion of such a report.

RECOMMENDATION

A further report will be made at the Committee meeting.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00940/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 26th Nov 1999

WARD Abbey

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: British Heart Foundation

PROPOSAL: External alterations and general refurbishment

SITE LOCATION: 15-16 Northgate Street Bath BA1 5AS

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The properties are on the east side of Northgate Street, opposite its junction with Upper Borough Walls - they are mid-terrace, comprising 5 floors (including basement and attic). No. 15 is presently vacant it was last used as retail, and retains a shopfront at ground floor level. The property is listed Grade II. Access is available at basement level to slippery lane - a narrow alleyway to the north.

An enclosed passageway links the front and rear areas of no. 15 at first floor level. Also at first floor level is a cantilevered w.c serving no. 16.

It is proposed to generally refurbish the buildings. The internal alterations are, inter alia, the subject of a related listed building application reported separately on this Agenda. The external alterations include the blocking up of a redundant window to slippery lane; the reroofing of a single storey flat-roofed extension to the rear; the removal of the enclosed link and cantilevered w.c at first floor level; and refurbishment of the shopfront. Whilst the applicant is British Heart Foundation, the application has been prepared by Property Services Division on behalf of the Council as landlord.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Building Regulations: no adverse comment.

Private Sector Renewal: express concern that the proposal will inhibit the possible future use of the first, second and third floors as residential units.

PLANNING ISSUES

Policy Context

The properties are listed buildings within the Conservation Area - Policies C2, C4, C6, C11, C12, C13, C14, C15 and C19 apply.

They include retail accommodation within the Central Shopping Area, with 3 further floors above - Policies R1 and R8 apply.

Relevant Planning History

Previous applications relate to various signage and shopfront proposals.

A current listed building application relates to the works described above, and to internal alterations, and is the subject of a separate report.

Conservation Area

The proposed external alterations largely comprise the removal of unsightly structures and finishes. Accordingly, the character and appearance of this part of this part of the Conservation Area would be unharmed.

Listed Buildings

The interior works in particular would affect the character of these listed buildings and this issue is examined in the report in the listed building application. A historical and archaeological study is being undertaken, and Members will be further advised in this regard. The internal works do not require planning permission.

Upper floors

Whilst no change of use is proposed, concern has been expressed regarding effect of the proposals upon the potential future use of the upper floors for residential use. Members are advised that Property Services have indicated that it is their intention, in the longer term, for the upper floors to be converted in association with no. 14 - which would enable direct access from street level.

CONCLUSION

These properties would benefit from refurbishment. Before the proposal can be fully supported, however, a historical and archaeological study needs to be submitted and assessed. Members will be further advised if such a study is received in time for the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

A further report will be made at the meeting.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01051/REG13 TYPE Regulation 13 Application

EXPIRY DATE 7th Jan 2000

WARD Abbey

Listed Building Grade IISTAR

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Sanctuary Housing Association

PROPOSAL: Internal alterations and general refurbishment to provide 5 no. self contained flats at 20 Milsom Street and 6 Barton Buildings

SITE LOCATION: 20 Milsom Street Bath BA1 1DE

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The works are proposed to these two terraced buildings which are linked by virtue of their physical locations as they back on to each other and a fire escape route from the upper floors of 20 Milsom Street runs through ground floor of 6 Barton Buildings. The two buildings however are different in character and the descriptions of the works can be considered separately.

6 Barton Buildings is listed Grade II* built 1763 by architect John Wood the Younger. Historically the building was built as a terraced town house with four floors above a basement and it has good quality architectural features within it including joinery (panelling and cupboards) and cornices. At present the second and third floors are occupied as a single unit and the subject of this application is the ground and first floors which are currently unoccupied. There are principally two rooms on each floor (one back, one front) accessed from a rear staircase. The front rooms on both floors are panelled and have finer detailing in the cornice and joinery and the rear rooms have an arched recess and a good plain cornice.

The proposal at 6 Barton Buildings is to create 2 no. self-contained flats, on each of the ground and first floors. This involves the division of each of the rear rooms to create an internal entrance lobby and bathroom, and on the first floor the removal of later partitions in the front room to restore the whole room.

20 Milsom Street is listed Grade II begun 1762. Originally built as a dwelling house the property is now retail at street level with three floors above which are currently vacant. There are good quality interiors with a particularly fine main staircase. The first and second floor rooms have been previously subdivided. The third floor is accessed from a winder stair and appears to be largely unaltered. The proposals are to create a self-contained flat on each of the three floors, which involves the removal of all previous subdivision and re-subdivision of rooms to create internal entrance lobbies and bathrooms. Significant alterations are proposed on the second floor to the historic winder stair.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

English Heritage (who will advise the Sec of State on the determination of the application) have objected to the scheme and state that they will not be able to advise the Secretary of State to issue consent. In both buildings the method of subdivision is considered to be unsympathetic to the quality of the spaces and the use considered to be over intensive. A preferred solution would be to see alternative arrangements with the minimum of architectural intervention. At 20 Milsom Street the removal of the winding staircase on the second floor is of particular concern. At 6 Barton Buildings, whilst the removal of the partitions to the first floor main room are welcomed to restore the room, "Overall these proposals appear to be too intensive, with a need to squeeze bathrooms into rooms that should not be subdivided as they already quite small spaces." Details are requested regarding the effects of upgrading of fire in order to assess the impact of this scheme adequately.

A neighbour has raised objections to the proposals for 6 Barton Buildings with regard to not including the basement within the works and the resulting loss of access to the back garden which is reported to be derelict. Also that the conversion to self-contained flats results in cramped units whose layout is unsympathetic to the existing structure and concern about the loss of details in the rear rooms, specifically the cornice, dado rail. "They are not suitable for internal sub-division into separate self contained flats essentially because the footprint of each floor is too small to create separate units of accommodation each with its own kitchen and sanitation".

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History

No planning history on 6 Barton Buildings.

20 Milsom Street:

5.3.96 - LBC approved. Upgrading of partition and door first floor

23.8.93 - LBC approved. Construction of new first floor link between the front and rear of the property.

23.7.93 - LBC approved Alterations to basement and rear guard and provision of fire escape link at first floor.

Local Plan Policies

See related planning report 99/00 /FUL and in addition; Policies C1, C3, C4, C11, C12, C13 of the local plan are relevant to the determination of this application.

Character and Setting of Listed Building and the Character and Appearance of this part of the Bath Conservation Area

Each of these two listed buildings has a distinct character which is contributed in part by their differing locations, their scales, and their finer architectural detailing. In general the proposals are to impose the same general layout in the conversion of each floor to a self contained one-bed flat and this layout impacts differently on each building.

At 20 Milsom Street the floor areas may be large enough to be converted to a self-contained one bedroom flat, however the proposal involves the apparently unnecessary taking down and rebuilding of earlier partitions and works at 2nd floor level to rearrange the layout which have a significant impact on the historic fabric. At 6 Barton Buildings the insertion of an internal bathroom and lobby within the small rear rooms severely compromises the qualities of those rooms and the location of the services will potentially cause irreversible damage to some of the architectural features. Many of the historic finishes which contribute to the character of the building survive and require more sensitive and sympathetic repair than is being proposed. Details of the fire and sound separation works which will be required in association with the proposed works have not been submitted and these would require listed building consent.

Reason for Application being reported to Committee

The Council cannot determine its own applications for listed building consent. Members are being asked to consider whether they wish to support the submission of this application to the Secretary of State for the Environment , Transport and the Regions for determination.

CONCLUSION

This application has been brought to Committee without the benefit of any negotiations following consultation with English Heritage. Whilst officers recognise the need for putting the vacant parts of these buildings into use in order to secure the buildings in the long term, the impact of the proposed level of the accommodation on the quality of the existing spaces, the plan form of the houses and the surviving architectural details is considered unacceptable and the subdivision has too great an impact on the surviving fabric of the building. It is considered that a less intensive proposal for dwellings within these buildings would be possible, and that more imaginative and less conventional layouts could be put in place which would be less intrusive on the historic building. Less intensive alternative uses might also be explored.

Your officers are meeting with Property Services and English Heritage to discuss the details of the proposal. Members will be informed of the outcome at the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

A further report will be made at the meeting.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01041/REG04 TYPE Regulation 4 Application

EXPIRY DATE 24th Dec 1999

WARD Abbey

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Sanctuary Housing Assoication

PROPOSAL: Proposed alterations and general refurbishment to provide 5 No. self contained flats at 20 Milsom Street and 6 Barton Buildings

SITE LOCATION: 20 Milsom Street Bath BA1 1DE

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

This application relates to proposed alterations and general refurbishment of the above Properties in order to provide 3no. self-contained flats at first, second and third floors of 20, Milsom Street and 2 no. self-contained flats at ground and 1st floor levels at 6 Barton Buildings.

The properties back on to each other and a fire escape route from the upper floors of 20 Milsom Street runs through ground floor of 6 Barton Buildings. Whilst linked the two buildings are however different in character.

6 Barton Buildings is listed Grade II* and was built in 1763 by architect John Wood the Younger. Historically the building was built as a terraced town house with four floors above a basement and it has good quality architectural features within it including joinery (panelling and cupboards) and cornices. At present the second and third floors are occupied as a single unit of residential accommodation. The ground and first floors, the subject of this application, are currently unoccupied. There are two principal rooms on each floor (one back, one front) accessed from a rear staircase. The front rooms on both floors are panelled and have finer detailing in the cornice and joinery and the rear rooms have an arched recess and a good plain cornice.

The proposal at 6 Barton Buildings is to create 2 no. self-contained flats, one on the ground floor and one on the first floor. In order to facilitate this it is proposed to divide each of the rear rooms to create an internal entrance lobby and bathroom. On the first floor it is proposed to remove later partitions in the front room to restore the whole room.

20 Milsom Street is listed Grade II. It was begun in 1762, originally built as a dwelling house. It is now in retail use at street level with three floors above which are currently vacant, although there is evidence that it was last used as a single unit of residential accommodation. There are good quality interiors with a particularly fine main staircase. The first and second floor rooms have been previously subdivided. The third floor is accessed from a winder stair and appears to be largely unaltered. The proposals are to create a self-contained flat on each of the three floors, which involves the removal of all previous subdivision and re-subdivision of rooms to create internal entrance lobbies and bathrooms. Significant alterations are proposed on the second floor to the historic winder stair.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

English Heritage object to the proposals. In both buildings the method of subdivision is considered to be unsympathetic to the quality of the spaces and the use considered to be over intensive. A preferred solution would be to see alternative arrangements with the minimum of architectural intervention. At 20 Milsom Street the removal of the winding staircase on the second floor is of particular concern. At 6 Barton Buildings, whilst the removal of the partitions to the first floor main room are welcomed to restore the room, "Overall these proposals appear to be too intensive, with a need to squeeze bathrooms into rooms that should not be subdivided as they already quite small spaces". Details are requested regarding the effects of upgrading of fire in order to assess the impact of this scheme adequately.

Building Control - No adverse comments

Private Sector Renewal - comments that in respect of 6 Barton Buildings the proposed bedrooms are below the minimum size for a one bedroom flat as set out in the Council's policy of Housing Standard, in addition wherever possible separate kitchens should be provided.

Engineering Services - No objections in this city centre location.

Neighbours - One letter has been received objecting to the proposal in respect of 6, Barton Buildings on the following grounds:- omission of the basement and resultant loss of access to the back garden which is reported to be derelict; conversion to self-contained flats results in cramped units whose layout is unsympathetic to the existing structure and concern about the loss of details in the rear rooms, specifically the cornice and dado rail.

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History

None with regard to 6 Barton Buildings.

In respect of 20 Milsom Street the following is relevant:-

5.3.96 - LBC approved. Upgrading of partition and door first floor

23.8.93 - LBC approved. Construction of new first floor link between the front and rear of the property.

23.7.93 - LBC approved Alterations to basement and rear guard and provision of fire escape link at first floor.

Planning Issues and Relevant Policies

1. Principle of Sub Division – Policies H9 and T25

2. Subsequent impact in terms of its scale and design upon the character and appearance of the conservation area and the architectural and historic character of these Grade II and Grade II* listed buildings – Policies C1-C4 (inclusive) and C11-C13 inclusive, C29 and Policy H9

3. Subsequent impact upon the amenities of adjoining and proposed occupiers - Policies H9 and H15.

Planning Considerations

1. With regard to the principle of sub division, Policy H9 of the adopted Bath Local Plan states that normally proposals for the conversion of properties into smaller units of residential accommodation will be permitted except where they would result in the loss of a property of a size and type, and in a location suitable for a single family dwellinghouse; would lead to excessive levels of on-street parking demand; or would lead to the loss or provision of inadequate garden space which would be detrimental to the character of the property or its surroundings.

The properties are located within Bath city centre, where the principle of residential development, particularly above shops, is encouraged in order to maintain the vitality/vibrancy of the City Centre. The proposed sub division and therefore intensity of the existing use is considered acceptable in principle in this location which might not be considered suitable for a single family. In terms of on-street parking demand it is considered that by reason of the type of accommodation provided coupled with the location that little additional demand will be placed on the existing on-street parking provision.

2. In terms of the impact of the proposals upon character and appearance of the conservation area and impact upon the architectural and historic character of buildings the following should be considered.

Each of these two listed buildings has a distinct character which is contributed in part by their differing locations, their scales, and their finer architectural detailing. In general the proposals are to impose the same general layout in the conversion of each floor to a self contained one-bed flat and this layout impacts differently on each building.

At 20 Milsom Street the floor areas may be large enough to be converted to a self-contained one bedroom flat, however the proposal involves the apparent unnecessary taking down and rebuilding of earlier partitions and works at 2nd floor level to rearrange the layout which have a significant impact on the historic fabric. At 6 Barton Buildings the insertion of an internal bathroom and lobby within the small rear rooms severely compromise the qualities of those rooms and the location of the services will potentially cause irreversible damage to some of the architectural features. Many of the historic finishes which contribute to the character of the building survive and require more sensitive and sympathetic repair than is being proposed. Details of the fire and sound separation works which will be required in association with the proposed works have not been submitted and these would require listed building consent.

2. The proposal will not have an adverse impact upon the general amenities of adjoining occupiers. In terms of future occupiers however it is considered that the intensity of the proposed use would result in accommodation that is below required space standards.

CONCLUSION

Whilst the principle of sub division is considered acceptable in this city centre location and whilst officers recognise the need for putting the vacant parts of these buildings into use in order to secure the buildings in the long term, the impact of the proposed level of the accommodation on the quality of the existing spaces, the plan form of the houses and the surviving architectural details is considered unacceptable and the subdivision has too great an impact on the surviving fabric of the building. It is considered that a less intensive proposal for dwellings within these buildings would be possible, and that more imaginative and less conventional layouts could be put in place which would be less intrusive on the historic building. Less intensive alternative uses might also be explored.

Your officers are meeting with Property Services and English Heritage to discuss the details of the proposal. Members will be informed of the outcome at the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

A further report will be made at the meeting.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00877/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 5th Nov 1999

WARD Lansdown

APPLICANT: Mr E Skinner

PROPOSAL: Erection of 2 no dwellinghouses and garages with new road access

SITE LOCATION: Land Rear Of 24-28 Tyning Terrace Bath

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The site subject to this application is a piece of overgrown land, slightly less than 0.1 hectare in area, situated at the south eastern end of a small cul-de-sac serving nos. 1-21 (odd) Marshfield Way, Fairfield Park. The site is located within a predominantly residential area, with a terrace of 5 dwellings – 24-28 Tyning Terrace, Fairfield Road - situated immediately to the north east, long rear garden / allotment areas situated to the south east, and other rear gardens and a pair of semi detached dwellings situated to the south west. The site rises gradually (approximately by 0.5 metres) from north to south, and more steeply (approximately by 2.75 metres) from east to west. Consequently, the properties of Tyning Terrace are at a lower level than the application site, whilst existing properties to the west are at a higher level. The site is located outside of the Bath Conservation Area.

This application seeks full planning permission for the erection of two detached dwellings, each having a detached single garage, with access taken from Marshfield Way.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Consultations

Private Sector Renewal: No observations

Building Control: Building Regulation application required. No adverse observations.

Engineering Services: The proposals cannot be supported in its present form due to the very cramped parking and manoeuvring area being provided. The present proposal provides a garage for each proposed dwelling with a secondary space in front of it, which will result in vehicles from both properties having to reverse out into the head of the cul-de-sac to extricate the garaged vehicles out. Secondary parking spaces should be provided alongside the proposed garages, so that each vehicle can gain entry and exit independently.

Representations

Local Residents: Thirteen letters have been received, objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

(i) Disruption caused during construction

(ii) Additional traffic leading to increased highway hazards

(iii) Change in character of street

(iv) Loss of trees and open land

(v) Impact on a local natural spring

(vi) Inaccurate plans

(vii) The scheme fails to address comments made by the Planning Inspector regarding an earlier appeal

(viii) Impact on wildlife

(ix) The turning head should be extended

(x) Loss of views

(xi) Overdevelopment of the site

(xii) Loss of privacy

(xiii) Increased noise

(xiv) Loss of value

(xv) Loss of light

(xvi) The design of the properties does not relate to the surrounding area

PLANNING ISSUES

1. Planning History

In 1987 outline planning permission was refused (13761/1) for the erection of two dwellings. A subsequent appeal in 1988 was allowed by the Department of the Environment.

In 1993 outline planning permission was granted (13761/2) for the erection of two dwellings.

In 1997 full planning permission was refused (96/00281/FUL) for the erection of two dwellings, on the grounds of: overbearing impact, loss of privacy, design and layout not in keeping, inadequate landscape details and failure to take account of levels.

2. Relevant Policies

Bath Local Plan

Policy H13: Residential Development

Policy H15: Residential Amenity

Policy T25: Highway Development Control Criteria

Policy L13: Wildlife and Nature Conservation

Policy L18: Landscape and New Development

Policy C1: World Heritage Site

Policy C2: Design

3. Principle of Development

The site is situated within the established built-up area and has no particular allocation or designation in the Local Plan. Subject to meeting the criteria set out in Policy H13, therefore, the principle of developing the site for residential is considered to be acceptable. Of course, the erection of two dwellings on this site has been accepted previously by the appeal decision of 1988 and by the subsequent granting of planning permission in 1993, although these permission have now expired.

4. Transportation

The proposed development would be accessed from Marshfield Way, which is a cul-de-sac already providing access to seven existing dwellings. The proposed dwellings would each have a detached single garage, and the plans have been amended in order to provide a parking space alongside each garage, with sufficient manoeuvring space to enable vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear. Officers consider that these arrangements are satisfactory and are of the view that the development would not generate additional traffic to materially affect the local highway network.

In granting outline planning permission in 1988, the Inspector made reference to an enlarged turning head at the end of Marshfield Way. An enlarged turning head formed part of the proposals at that time, however, vehicles leaving the dwellings would have had to reverse out onto the turning head. Officers are of the view that the turning facilities now provided within the application site would be more effective in minimising any conflicts in Marshfield Way.

Concerns have been raised regarding the possibility of vehicles accessing the proposed development from a private access lane that leads to the site from Queenwood Avenue to the south. The access to the site is proposed from Marshfield Way, however, in order to prevent any possible formation of rear access onto the private lane, a condition is included prohibiting this.

5. Residential Amenity

The location of the site at a higher level than residential properties to the north and east means that the proposed design and layout of the proposed dwellings have to be carefully considered in order to avoid a material loss of amenity. In accepting that the site could accommodate two dwellings, the Inspector in 1988 stated that, in order to avoid loss of amenity, the dwellings should be located centrally within the site and "step down" in order to reflect the fall of the site.

The submitted layout illustrates that the proposed dwellings would be located relatively central to the site, and certainly more central than the illustrative plan considered by the Inspector. There would be a gap of 2 metres between the two dwellings, and the dwelling nearest Tyning Terrace would be situated at least 5 metres from the site boundary and 15.5 metres away from the nearest existing dwelling. The proposed dwellings would have floor levels that would step down the site, with there being a difference of 1 metre between the finished floor levels of the two dwellings. Both dwellings would have a ridge height of approximately 7.5 metres, therefore, achieving the "stepping down" requested. The floor levels of the proposed dwellings would be generally similar to the levels at the end of Marshfield Way. In addition to this, the proposed dwelling nearest Tyning Terrace has been deliberately designed so that its roof rises away from Tyning Terrace, rather than having a gable end. All of these factors lead officers to consider that the proposed dwellings would relate well to the existing contours of the land and would not materially harm the general amenities of adjoining residential occupiers.

In granting planning permission for two dwellings at the site, the Inspector considered that the privacy of neighbouring residents would not be materially harmed if the existing screen fence along the north eastern boundary was retained and if there were no habitable room windows facing Tyning Terrace. The submitted plans confirm the retention of the screen fence along the north eastern boundary and the only window facing Tyning Terrace would be a ground floor kitchen window, which officers consider would not materially harm privacy levels due to the presence of the existing fence. A condition is proposed, preventing the insertion of any further windows in this particular elevation. The Inspector went on to say that he felt that the oblique relationship between the site and the dwelling immediately to the north -5 Marshfield Way- was such that occupiers of this existing property would not be significantly affected. Having regard to these matters, officers consider that the proposal would not materially harm the levels of privacy of existing neighbouring occupiers.

With regard to construction works, officers consider that the inevitable activity related to implementing any permission granted would not be significant so as to warrant the refusal of planning permission in this case.

6. Design

Officers consider that the proposed development would have the effect of providing a logical "end stop" to the cul-de-sac of Marshfield Way. Both properties would face back up the road and address the road as the existing properties do. The dwellings would be constructed in materials to generally match neighbouring properties, such as artificial Bath stone and concrete tiles, and samples are required by condition. In other terms, the proposed dwellings would have more of an individual appearance, and do not aim to mimic existing properties at Marshfield Way. Existing properties at Marshfield Way are not of particular townscape or architectural merit, in the opinion of officers, therefore, officers have no objections to this approach.

7. Landscape and Nature Conservation

The application is largely overgrown with a number of small trees near the north west boundary of the site. The submitted layout allows for the retention of the most significant of the trees. An ecological assessment of the site has also been carried out, which has not identified any nature conservation interest worthy of retention. No objections, therefore, are raised on these grounds.

CONCLUSION

The principle of developing the site for two dwellings has been accepted firstly on appeal by a Planning Inspector, and subsequently by the previous authority. The submitted scheme complies with guidance set out in the Inspectors report and Local Plan policies, and officers are of the view that the proposal would not materially harm residential amenity, highway safety, the visual amenities of the area or nature conservation interests.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

1 There shall be no means of vehicular access to the site other than from Marshfield Way in accordance with the approved plans.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety.

2 No development shall be commenced until a hard and soft landscape scheme has been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme shall include details of all walls, fences, trees, hedgerows and other planting which are to be retained; details of new walls, fences and other boundary treatment and finished ground levels; a planting specification to include numbers, density, size, species and positions of all new trees and shrubs; details of the surface treatment of the open parts of the site; and a programme of implementation.

REASON: To ensure the provision of an appropriate landscape setting to the development.

3 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

4 No site works or clearance shall be commenced until protective fences which conform with British Standard 5837:1991 have been erected around any existing trees and other existing or proposed landscape areas in positions which have previously been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Until the development has been completed these fences shall not be removed and the protected areas are to be kept clear of any building, plant, material, debris and trenching, with the existing ground levels maintained, and there shall be no entry to those areas except for arboricultural or landscape works.

REASON: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

5 Prior to the commencement of any form of site works or clearance the Local Planning Authority shall be given not less than two weeks notice in writing of these works to ensure that appropriate measures of landscape protection required under condition have been implemented in accordance with the approved plans or conditions.

REASON: To ensure that adequate protection is given to the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

6 The existing trees and hedges shall be retained in accordance with the approved details. The development shall not be commenced unless the identified trees and hedges have been so retained. Any retained tree or hedge which within five years of the approved development being occupied or completed, whichever is the sooner, dies, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced by a similar species of a size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority during the next planting season or in accordance with a programme of replacement to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To safeguard the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

7 No development shall commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

8 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 ( or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows, roof lights or openings, other than those shown on the plans hereby approved, shall be formed in the north east elevation of proposal two at any time unless specific written permission has first been obtained from the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy.

9 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no fences, gates, walls or other means of enclosure shall be erected or placed within the curtilage of any dwellinghouse forward of any wall of that dwellinghouse which fronts onto a highway without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of the visual amenity and character of the area.

10 No dwelling shall be occupied until its associated screen walls/fences or other means of enclosure have been erected in accordance with the approved plans.

REASON: In the interests of privacy and/or visual amenity.

11 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no extension or enlargement (including additions or alterations to the roof(s)) of the dwelling(s) hereby approved shall be carried out without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: Any further extensions require detailed consideration by the Local Planning Authority to safeguard the amenities of the surrounding area.

12 The dwelling(s) shall not be occupied until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plan(s) for the parking and turning of vehicles and such area(s) shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development.

REASON: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street parking and turning of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

13 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commenced until the garage(s) identified on the approved plan(s) has/have been provided and such garage(s) shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than for the garaging of vehicles associated with the development.

REASON: To maintain adequate off-street parking in the interests of highway safety.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00896/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 17th Nov 1999

WARD Combe Down

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: G Manning And Sons Ltd

PROPOSAL: Change of use of former public house to offices with parking to rear via new vehicle access

SITE LOCATION: 106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The applicant's site is that of the former Masons Arms Public House, including the former outbuildings including the beer store and skittle alley, the garden of the house and part of the premises of Mannings which front onto Oxford Place. The house is a listed building in the Conservation Area and there is a listed building application with this duplicate application.

The Mason's Arms is a two floor property with a frontage of nearly 7.0 metres to North Road. The existing residential accommodation only includes a one bedroom flat on the first floor above the ground floor bars. The area of accommodation is reduced by the presence of a flying freehold (probably the size of a second bedroom) on the westside of the upper floor. The other properties in the terrace from No. 100 to 106A, even numbers, are in residential use.

The outbuildings referred to above back onto the premises of Mannings which occupy a frontage of nearly 40 metres to Oxford Place. The garden of the Masons Arms includes the outbuildings behind the former public house and partly behind No. 104 North Road but it also extends behind Trenance, a neighbouring house on the south side of the Mannings buildings, as far as the walled lane which runs at the back of houses fronting the east side of The Avenue. This garden is 12.0 metres wide at the end of the garden.

The application is to use the former public house for storage and office use and the garden as turning and parking space for vehicles. The buildings would be retained very much as originally with some new windows and door openings as well as alterations internally. A nearly 10.0 metre section of the former skittle alley would be demolished. In the garden the north-west facing length of boundary would be rebuilt where necessary to provide a 1.8 metre high stone wall with dressed copings in place of a close boarded fence. This is intended to assist in screening the car parking area for up to 7 vehicles. Access to the car park would be from Oxford Place through the south west corner of Mannings offices.

Ancillary information submitted to support the application

Mannings and Sons have operated in the Combe Down area from its present site since the early years of this century when the relationship with stone quarry and stone working traditions and Combe Down were much closer. Iti s also evident that over that period of time there has been a close link between Mannings premises and the Masons Arms so that the work of building, quarrying and brewing have been carried on these premises since the 1800s. Today the present offices of Mannings administer seven businesses including:-

Mannings - 22 permanent employees

Erwood and Morris - 4 permanent employees

J W Knight and Son - 6 permanent employees

MFM Ltd - 15 permanent employees

Office/Supervisory Staff for the above - 13 permanent employees

Undertaking and Funeral Directing - 1 permanent employee

Prior Park Garden Centre

Fred Daw Garden Centre, Trowbridge

A total of 100 staff are employed in these businesses and these offer employment to a larger workforce of sub-contractors.

Some of these businesses such as MFM Ltd and Lloyd Blackmore, another company controlled by the group but not administered from Combe Down are expanding. Providing more office space at Combe Down is therefore essential to Mannings business plan.

Many of the employees rely on vehicles to carry out their work and this involves them carrying expensive equipment with them. This is vulnerable if parked overnight on the street outside employee's homes.

The provision of a secure head office car park where vehicle can be serviced from stores is an important objective so too is bringing Lloyd Blackmore to Combe Down.

As the offices are based outside the centre of Bath good accessibility is available. Mannings have examined the courses of action available to provide for the future including relocating elsewhere. They are encouraged to consolidate in Combe Down by local factors which include the difficulty of finding suitable accommodation for the Funeral Directors business, the fact that this business is staffed by extra personnel from related businesses and the local residence of a large proportion of the workforce. The business is probably Combe Down's largest employer; three out of four employees of the group live within the Bath boundary and the majority of there are on the south side of Bath.

Planning Issues considered by the applicants

The loss of residential accommodation in the Mason's Arms

The space available is limited by the flying freehold on the first floor and its accommodation extending behind the frontage makes it difficult to convert to residential accommodation. The front large area of glazing, which is part of the listed building is also unsatisfactory for a house alongside a footway and busy main road.

The loss of the Public House

The brewers have sold the Masons Arms with a covenant that if shall not be used again as licensed premises having been forced to cease operation as a public house due to its small size and nearby competition.

The application would enable the continuity of history to be recognised if the business continued links with the Mason's Arms.

Highway Matters

At present there are only 10 car parking spaces on the Mannings premises, it is difficult to maintain a loading facility for stores, for the delivery of coffins and the parking of hearses or vans. Vehicles inevitably occupy road space. The addition of seven spaces would allow more flexibility. It would enable specific space to be allocated for hearses and other vehicles and reduce on street parking. A study of the movement of vehicles in the businesses is included with the application.

Conservation Character

The demolition of the pub's skittle alley has been considered carefully but as a peripheral outbuilding of no great merit it has not appeared justified to retain this on Listed Building grounds.

The loss of the open space of the former pub garden has also been considered but its contribution to the Conservation Area is not one which the public would be aware of as a site hidden behind the long gardens (30 metres) of North Road. The trees at the western end can be retained and new trees planted. The amenities of neighbouring gardens can be enhanced by the provision of a wall 1.8 metres high.

As the proportion of accommodation held by Mannings is so high in this area the amount of hard paved area will not appear excessive or disproportionate.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

The observations of Engineering Services are awaited.

The advice on the use of the Mason's Arms from Housing and Social Services as housing accommodation is that the building could retain a residential unit as well as office accommodation.

Representations

One letter has been received supporting the proposal because of the neighbourly nature and attitude maintained by Mannings Companies.

There have been three letters of concern or objection to the use of the public house garden as a car park. Local residents identify the potential disturbance from early morning starting of vehicles but one states that with the proposed wall built to the height of 1.8 metres and no overnight parking they would not object to the proposal. Other residents are seriously worried about the noise and fumes that would result from the car parking. One resident points out that the 3 metre high wall alongside The Avenue is ineffective at keeping out noise and fumes and does not except that the wall proposed will prevent pollution and disturbance. The argument is also made that it is not in keeping with the Conservation Area to establish a car park amongst gardens.

PLANNING ISSUES

The matters raised are the loss of accommodation which has an existing and potential housing use; the demolition of part of a listed building in the Conservation Area (this is considered by the Listed Building Application) and the use of the garden of the former public house as a car park.

The Masons Arms house is one of a terrace of five houses, the other four are in residential use. The living accommodation has been restricted so far by the ground floor bar and the flying freehold of No.104 on the first floor. Housing and Social Services consider the building suitable for residential use. The applicants contention that the front window of the bar causes the building to be vulnerable has significance but the front is only half glazed and similar conversions have enabled satisfactory living accommodation even in the City centre. The extent of outbuildings used for storing beer and as a skittle alley is not excessive. A house owner might be pleased to take this space on as ancillary spaces and these may be capable of conversion to occupation. The stone built outhouses all contribute to the enclosure of the garden.

The use of the garden as a car park may be better considered with the benefit of landscape advice and this has been requested. The applicant's argument that as the garden is not visible to the public its value is very limited is not justified. It is the very fact that it is enclosed and has obvious visual barriers to outside noise and disturbance that contributes to the significance of the space. Nearby residents enjoy the quiet and do not want the intrusion of vehicles, noise and fumes. Even if trees can be retained and planted in the parking area the nature of the space would change fundamentally if used for parking. The established pattern of road side access spaces on the front of the buildings and private gardens behind provides a recognised and predictable use of space. Allowing vehicles into the semi-private garden area would challenge a fundamental aspect of the character of the area.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Masons Arms for office purposes would be contrary to policy H8 of the Local Plan which states that the Council will not grant permission for development which would result in the loss of existing residential or potential residential accommodation. The exception to the policy includes a substantial conservation benefit, provision of visitor accommodation on environmental or practical considerations where there is no reasonable prospect of achieving a residential use. Provision for an expanding business is not included as an exception to the application of this policy.

In this case as the Masons Arms is one of a terrace of five houses it appears most logical to confirm the complete residential occupation of the terrace.

As regards the garden area this has to be considered in regard to the requirements of Policy C4 of the Local Plan which aims to implement Government advice regarding the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. Some uses may not enhance an area but because the use does not prevent preservation or cause actual harm the use may be acceptable. It is not possible to consider a hard surfaced car parking area as a use that will not cause harm. Further advice will be made available on the retention of trees but the hard surfaces and the noise, fumes and glinting bodywork of vehicles cannot be considered acceptable in this part of the Conservation Area.

It is recognised that the applicants have a substantial business in Combe Down and provide local employment. The premises and surroundings of Oxford Place do however appear to be a restricted context for such an expanding business. It appears that additional office space would generate more access requirements and at present the existing car parking and delivery space is insufficient. The additional car park area proposed appears unlikely to meet all the potential requirements.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE

1 The change of use from public house to office is contrary to the intentions of Policy H8 of the Bath Local Plan which requires the Council to retain existing or potential residential accommodation in a building originally designed for residential use.

2 The works required to make a new access and to provide a car park would be contrary to the intentions of Policy C4 of the Bath Local Plan which seeks to ensure that proposals preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00898/LBA TYPE Listed Building Consent (Alts/exts)

EXPIRY DATE 17th Nov 1999

WARD Combe Down

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: G Mannings And Son Ltd

PROPOSAL: Demolition of part of a building attached to a listed building with minor alterations and restoration to enable change of use from public house to office with parking at the rear

SITE LOCATION: 106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The property is known as the Masons Arms Public House, and is a Grade 2 Listed Building which forms part of the listed group 100 – 106 North Road. The group forms a prominent road frontage in the Bath Conservation Area.

From information provided by the applicants, the building and its neighbours may date to 1809. The 1851 map shows the building and the use as a pub probably began in the 1860’s. The rear buildings, including the skittle alley, date between 1851 and 1888 and are part of the character of the building. They are built of ashlar with slate and pantile roofs.

The service wing of the pub forms an informal composition of traditional roofs and structures with the adjacent workshops and houses, and contributes to the character of this part of the conservation area.

The proposals involve the demolition of a mid-late 19^th century skittles alley to allow the use of the present rear garden area for the parking of cars and internal alterations for the change of use to offices. There is a small free-standing stable block in the grounds, which is to be retained.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Private Sector Renewal: objects to loss of potential housing unit.

Building Control: the site is within an area of former mining workings.

Highways: no comments

No other representations.

PLANNING ISSUES

Local Plan Policies

Policies C1, C2, C3, C4, C11, C12, C13 and C15 of the Bath Local Plan are relevant to the determination of this application.

Character and Setting of Listed Building

The building fronts north Road and no alterations (apart from some minor improvements) are to be made to this elevation. The rear service wing is an accumulation of Victorian additions and as such is part of the evolving history of the building. They are of interest and have a simple and attractive functional character. The loss of the skittle alley would normally be resisted unless there was an overriding benefit to the listed building itself or to the conservation area. The provision of parking of is not considered to be a significant benefit.

The applicant has stated that the possibility of alternative use as a house is rendered unlikely as the garden would be overlooked by the first floor window of the flying freehold. Not withstanding this, I consider that the building could be converted to a house without significant impact on the internal character or plan form of the building. Conversion to more units may be more problematic.

Character and Appearance of this part of the Bath Conservation Area

The loss of the skittles alley would diminish the character of the group of functional buildings. The use of the garden area as a carpark would intrude into the character of the garden landscape character of this part of the conservation area. Although the provision of a rubblestone wall would be an improvement on the existing boundary treatment, it is not considered that this would outweigh the disbenefits of the car parking.

Reason for Application being reported to Committee

This case is to be considered along with the current planning application reported elsewhere on this agenda.

CONCLUSION

The proposed demolition of the former skittles alley would be detrimental to the historic interest of the building and the conservation area. The use of the former beer garden for car parking would also intrude into the garden character of this part of the conservation area.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE

1 The loss of the former skittles alley would be detrimental to the historic and architectural character of this statutorily listed building which is within the Bath Conservation Area

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00031/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 2nd Mar 2000

WARD Combe Down

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: G Manning & Son Ltd

PROPOSAL: Change of use of former public house to offices with parking to rear via new vehicle access from G Mannings and Sons Ltd offices (duplicate application)

SITE LOCATION: 106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The applicant's site is that of the former Masons Arms Public House, including the former outbuildings including the beer store and skittle alley, the garden of the house and part of the premises of Mannings which front onto Oxford Place. The house is a listed building in the Conservation Area and there is a listed building application with this duplicate application.

The Mason's Arms is a two floor property with a frontage of nearly 7.0 metres to North Road. The existing residential accommodation only includes a one bedroom flat on the first floor above the ground floor bars. The area of accommodation is reduced by the presence of a flying freehold (probably the size of a second bedroom) on the westside of the upper floor. The other properties in the terrace from No. 100 to 106A, even numbers, are in residential use.

The outbuildings referred to above back onto the premises of Mannings which occupy a frontage of nearly 40 metres to Oxford Place. The garden of the Masons Arms includes the outbuildings behind the former public house and partly behind No. 104 North Road but it also extends behind Trenance, a neighbouring house on the south side of the Mannings buildings, as far as the walled lane which runs at the back of houses fronting the east side of The Avenue. This garden is 12.0 metres wide at the end of the garden.

The application is to use the former public house for storage and office use and the garden as turning and parking space for vehicles. The buildings would be retained very much as originally with some new windows and door openings as well as alterations internally. A nearly 10.0 metre section of the former skittle alley would be demolished. In the garden the north-west facing length of boundary would be rebuilt where necessary to provide a 1.8 metre high stone wall with dressed copings in place of a close boarded fence. This is intended to assist in screening the car parking area for up to 7 vehicles. Access to the car park would be from Oxford Place through the south west corner of Mannings offices.

Ancillary information submitted to support the application

Mannings and Sons have operated in the Combe Down area from its present site since the early years of this century when the relationship with stone quarry and stone working traditions and Combe Down were much closer. Iti s also evident that over that period of time there has been a close link between Mannings premises and the Masons Arms so that the work of building, quarrying and brewing have been carried on these premises since the 1800s. Today the present offices of Mannings administer seven businesses including:-

Mannings - 22 permanent employees

Erwood and Morris - 4 permanent employees

J W Knight and Son - 6 permanent employees

MFM Ltd - 15 permanent employees

Office/Supervisory Staff for the above - 13 permanent employees

Undertaking and Funeral Directing - 1 permanent employee

Prior Park Garden Centre

Fred Daw Garden Centre, Trowbridge

A total of 100 staff are employed in these businesses and these offer employment to a larger workforce of sub-contractors.

Some of these businesses such as MFM Ltd and Lloyd Blackmore, another company controlled by the group but not administered from Combe Down are expanding. Providing more office space at Combe Down is therefore essential to Mannings business plan.

Many of the employees rely on vehicles to carry out their work and this involves them carrying expensive equipment with them. This is vulnerable if parked overnight on the street outside employee's homes.

The provision of a secure head office car park where vehicle can be serviced from stores is an important objective so too is bringing Lloyd Blackmore to Combe Down.

As the offices are based outside the centre of Bath good accessibility is available. Mannings have examined the courses of action available to provide for the future including relocating elsewhere. They are encouraged to consolidate in Combe Down by local factors which include the difficulty of finding suitable accommodation for the Funeral Directors business, the fact that this business is staffed by extra personnel from related businesses and the local residence of a large proportion of the workforce. The business is probably Combe Down's largest employer; three out of four employees of the group live within the Bath boundary and the majority of there are on the south side of Bath.

Planning Issues considered by the applicants

The loss of residential accommodation in the Mason's Arms

The space available is limited by the flying freehold on the first floor and its accommodation extending behind the frontage makes it difficult to convert to residential accommodation. The front large area of glazing, which is part of the listed building is also unsatisfactory for a house alongside a footway and busy main road.

The loss of the Public House

The brewers have sold the Masons Arms with a covenant that if shall not be used again as licensed premises having been forced to cease operation as a public house due to its small size and nearby competition.

The application would enable the continuity of history to be recognised if the business continued links with the Mason's Arms.

Highway Matters

At present there are only 10 car parking spaces on the Mannings premises, it is difficult to maintain a loading facility for stores, for the delivery of coffins and the parking of hearses or vans. Vehicles inevitably occupy road space. The addition of seven spaces would allow more flexibility. It would enable specific space to be allocated for hearses and other vehicles and reduce on street parking. A study of the movement of vehicles in the businesses is included with the application.

Conservation Character

The demolition of the pub's skittle alley has been considered carefully but as a peripheral outbuilding of no great merit it has not appeared justified to retain this on Listed Building grounds.

The loss of the open space of the former pub garden has also been considered but its contribution to the Conservation Area is not one which the public would be aware of as a site hidden behind the long gardens (30 metres) of North Road. The trees at the western end can be retained and new trees planted. The amenities of neighbouring gardens can be enhanced by the provision of a wall 1.8 metres high.

As the proportion of accommodation held by Mannings is so high in this area the amount of hard paved area will not appear excessive or disproportionate.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

The observations of Engineering Services are awaited.

The advice on the use of the Mason's Arms from Housing and Social Services as housing accommodation is that the building could retain a residential unit as well as office accommodation.

Representations

One letter has been received supporting the proposal because of the neighbourly nature and attitude maintained by Mannings Companies.

There have been three letters of concern or objection to the use of the public house garden as a car park. Local residents identify the potential disturbance from early morning starting of vehicles but one states that with the proposed wall built to the height of 1.8 metres and no overnight parking they would not object to the proposal. Other residents are seriously worried about the noise and fumes that would result from the car parking. One resident points out that the 3 metre high wall alongside The Avenue is ineffective at keeping out noise and fumes and does not except that the wall proposed will prevent pollution and disturbance. The argument is also made that it is not in keeping with the Conservation Area to establish a car park amongst gardens.

PLANNING ISSUES

The matters raised are the loss of accommodation which has an existing and potential housing use; the demolition of part of a listed building in the Conservation Area (this is considered by the Listed Building Application) and the use of the garden of the former public house as a car park.

The Masons Arms house is one of a terrace of five houses, the other four are in residential use. The living accommodation has been restricted so far by the ground floor bar and the flying freehold of No.104 on the first floor. Housing and Social Services consider the building suitable for residential use. The applicants contention that the front window of the bar causes the building to be vulnerable has significance but the front is only half glazed and similar conversions have enabled satisfactory living accommodation even in the City centre. The extent of outbuildings used for storing beer and as a skittle alley is not excessive. A house owner might be pleased to take this space on as ancillary spaces and these may be capable of conversion to occupation. The stone built outhouses all contribute to the enclosure of the garden.

The use of the garden as a car park may be better considered with the benefit of landscape advice and this has been requested. The applicant's argument that as the garden is not visible to the public its value is very limited is not justified. It is the very fact that it is enclosed and has obvious visual barriers to outside noise and disturbance that contributes to the significance of the space. Nearby residents enjoy the quiet and do not want the intrusion of vehicles, noise and fumes. Even if trees can be retained and planted in the parking area the nature of the space would change fundamentally if used for parking. The established pattern of road sound access spaces on the front of the buildings and private gardens behind provides a recognised and predictable use of space. Allowing vehicles into the semi-private garden area would challenge a fundamental aspect of the character of the area.

CONCLUSION

The use of the Masons Arms for office purposes would be contrary to policy H8 of the Local Plan which states that the Council will not grant permission for development which would result in the loss of existing residential or potential residential accommodation. The exception to the policy includes a substantial conservation benefit, provision of visitor accommodation on environmental or practical considerations where there is no reasonable prospect of achieving a residential use. Provision for an expanding business is not included as an exception to the application of this policy.

In this case as the Masons Arms is one of a terrace of five houses it appears most logical to confirm the complete residential occupation of the terrace.

As regards the garden area this has to be considered in regard to the requirements of Policy C4 of the Local Plan which aims to implement Government advice regarding the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. Some uses may not enhance an area but because the use does not prevent preservation or cause actual harm the use may be acceptable. It is not possible to consider a hard surfaced car parking area as a use that will not cause harm. Further advice will be made available on the retention of trees but the hard surfaces and the noise, fumes and glinting bodywork of vehicles cannot be considered acceptable in this part of the Conservation Area.

It is recognised that the applicants have a substantial business in Combe Down and provide local employment. The premises and surroundings of Oxford Place do however appear to be a restricted context for such an expanding business. It appears that additional office space would generate more access requirements and at present the existing car parking and delivery space is insufficient. The additional car park area proposed appears unlikely to meet all the potential requirements.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE

1 The change of use from public house to office is contrary to the intentions of Policy H8 of the Bath Local Plan which requires the Council to retain existing or potential residential accommodation in a building originally designed for residential use.

2 The works required to make a new access and to provide a car park would be contrary to the intentions of Policy C4 of the Bath Local Plan which seeks to ensure that proposals preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00034/LBA TYPE Listed Building Consent (Alts/exts)

EXPIRY DATE 2nd Mar 2000

WARD Combe Down

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: G Manning And Son Ltd

PROPOSAL: Demolition of part of a building attached to a listed building with minor alterations and restoration to enable change of use from public house to office with parking at the rear (duplicate application)

SITE LOCATION: 106 North Road Combe Down Bath BA2 5DJ

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The property is known as the Masons Arms Public House, and is a Grade 2 Listed Building which forms part of the listed group 100 – 106 North Road. The group forms a prominent road frontage in the Bath Conservation Area.

From information provided by the applicants, the building and its neighbours may date to 1809. The 1851 map shows the building and the use as a pub probably began in the 1860’s. The rear buildings, including the skittle alley, date between 1851 and 1888 and are part of the character of the building. They are built of ashlar with slate and pantile roofs.

The service wing of the pub forms an informal composition of traditional roofs and structures with the adjacent workshops and houses, and contributes to the character of this part of the conservation area.

The proposals involve the demolition of a mid-late 19^th century skittles alley to allow the use of the present rear garden area for the parking of cars and internal alterations for the change of use to offices. There is a small free-standing stable block in the grounds, which is to be retained.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Private Sector Renewal: objects to loss of potential housing unit.

Building Control: the site is within an area of former mining workings.

Highways: no comments

No other representations.

PLANNING ISSUES

Local Plan Policies

Policies C1, C2, C3, C4, C11, C12, C13 and C15 of the Bath Local Plan are relevant to the determination of this application.

Character and Setting of Listed Building

The building fronts north Road and no alterations (apart from some minor improvements) are to be made to this elevation. The rear service wing is an accumulation of Victorian additions and as such is part of the evolving history of the building. They are of interest and have a simple and attractive functional character. The loss of the skittle alley would normally be resisted unless there was an overriding benefit to the listed building itself or to the conservation area. The provision of parking of is not considered to be a significant benefit.

The applicant has stated that the possibility of alternative use as a house is rendered unlikely as the garden would be overlooked by the first floor window of the flying freehold. Not withstanding this, I consider that the building could be converted to a house without significant impact on the internal character or plan form of the building. Conversion to more units may be more problematic.

Character and Appearance of this part of the Bath Conservation Area

The loss of the skittles alley would diminish the character of the group of functional buildings. The use of the garden area as a car park would intrude into the character of the garden landscape character of this part of the conservation area. Although the provision of a rubblestone wall would be an improvement on the existing boundary treatment, it is not considered that this would outweigh the disbenefits of the car parking.

Reason for Application being reported to Committee

This case is to be considered along with the current planning application reported elsewhere on this agenda.

CONCLUSION

The proposed demolition of the former skittles alley would be detrimental to the historic interest of the building and the conservation area. The use of the former beer garden for car parking would also intrude into the garden character of this part of the conservation area.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE

1 The loss of the former skittles alley would be detrimental to the historic and architectural character of this statutorily listed building which is within the Bath Conservation Area.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00233/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 31st Mar 2000

WARD Bathwick

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: LDC (Sydney Wharf) Ltd

PROPOSAL: Conversion of office buildings into accommodation for 152 students with 20 car parking spaces. Revised Proposal. (Retrospective application)

SITE LOCATION: Former British Gas Clevelands Building Sydney Wharf Bath BA2 4EP

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

This application is a revised and retrospective application for student accommodation at the former British Gas offices at Clevelands, Sydney Wharf. In December 1998 planning permission was granted to convert Clevelands into accommodation for 165 students with a further 27 student accommodated in two new buildings on a former car park site adjoining the Kennet and Avon Canal. A total of 24 car parking spaces would also be provided. This application does not include the erection of the additional accommodation on the former car park site as this can still be implemented by virtue of the December 1998 planning permission.

The current proposal is for 152 students to be accommodated within the Clevelands building, a reduction of 13 from the previous scheme with three car parking spaces adjoining the north side of the building, a further five spaces to the south on land at the junction of Raby Mews and Sydney Wharf and the remaining twelve located on the former car park site adjoining the canal.

A revised planning application is required for the student accommodation within Clevelands as the internal layout has been changed to comply with the Building Regulations, to meet the minimum internal space standards for this type of accommodation, to increase storage for refuse and to increase the provision for secure bicycle parking as this has also been found to be inadequate. Externally, this has led to the repositioning of the entrance door onto Sydney Wharf, the introduction of louvred doors at ground floor level on the Raby Mews elevation, the construction of a new cycle store within the internal courtyard for 40 bicycles and minor changes to the style and position of the doors and windows onto this courtyard. Alterations are also proposed for the three car parking spaces to the north of the building.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

No adverse comments have been received from consultees.

Bath Society has commented that the proposal has come about due to "a remarkable set of bloomers".

PLANNING ISSUES

In July 1998 planning permission was granted for Clevelands and the adjoining car park site to be developed for the accommodation of 170 students. In December 1998 planning permission was granted for these sites to be development for the accommodation of 192 students.

The principle of student accommodation at Clevelands has been accepted by the Council on two previous occasions. The current proposal makes changes to Clevelands which do not harm its appearance and reduces the number of students that will be accommodated in this building when compared to the previous permissions. The alterations to the three parking spaces to the north of the building and the proposed material for the surfacing of the internal courtyard still needs to be considered and further details are required about the surface treatment of the five car parking spaces to the south of Clevelands in addition to the planting proposals for the internal courtyard. If the details relating to these areas are found to be satisfactory then planning permission can be granted. No objections have been received from local residents.

CONCLUSION

The planning application, if found acceptable will need to be the subject of a Section 106 Agreement to ensure that only students attending Bath University are accommodated at the premises, students are not allowed cars, the bus service from Bathwick Hill to the University campus is maintained in addition to other operational matters. Appropriate planning conditions will also have to be imposed.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to PERMIT subject to the receipt of satisfactory proposals for the surfacing of the car parking areas and the internal courtyard, planting proposals and the applicant entering into a legal obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act dealing with the occupation, control and management of the site including a restriction to Bath University students only, control over the use of cars, ownership of the site, security, the number of residential tutorial staff and the location of their accommodation, cabling, refuse collection and disposal, maintenance of the existing bus service in Bathwick Hill to the University campus and the provision to students of bus passes and other related issues and subject to the following conditions:

1 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

2 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commenced until provision has been made within the site in accordance with the approved plan(s) for the parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles associated with the development.

REASON: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for off-street, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles in the interests of highway safety.

3 The development hereby approved shall not be occupied or the use commenced until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plan(s) for the parking of bicycles, and that area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking of bicycles associated with the development.

REASON: To ensure that sufficient provision is made for the off-street parking of bicycles.

4 Prior to the occupation of the development, the refuse store(s) indicate on the approved plans shall be provided and shall be permanently retained thereafter solely for this purpose. No refuse shall be stored outside the building(s) other than in the refuse store(s) hereby approved.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and of the amenities of the area.

5 The rooms/areas shown on the deposited plans shall not be used for any purpose other than that shown on the deposited plan.

REASON: To avoid the over development of the site.

6 The development shall be occupied by no more than 152 people unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure satisfactory off-street parking provision and to avoid the overdevelopment of the site in the interest of the amenities of nearby occupiers.

7 No part of the development shall be occupied until the development has been constructed/adopted to ensure that the internal noise levels do not exceed the recommended maximum for steady intrusive noises in dwellings, recommended in BS8233:1987 with adequate measures to maintain satisfactory ventilation with windows shut.

REASON: To ensure satisfactory housing standards.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00043/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 3rd Mar 2000

WARD Oldfield

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Mrs B Baskerville

PROPOSAL: Additional car parking

SITE LOCATION: Baskervilles Gym Englishcombe Lane Bath BA2 2EF

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The Gymnasium is a modern building, constructed on land to the south of Moorlands Junior School, Moorfields Road. The access to the site is via a track to The Moorlands, which is served off Englishcombe Lane, through a Council owned recreation area. The east of the access track is a hedge of Hawthorn, Elder, Sycamore and Privet with specimen trees reinforcing the hedgerow. This hedgerow forms the western boundary of the application site.

The proposed parking areas are situated between the hedge and the Gymnasium building. The site to the north of the access drive, through the Gymnasium car park, is an untidy, grassed verge but it is sited beneath the canopy of a Horse Chestnut tree (T1). There is a rather sparse, neglected hedge adjoining the playground to Moorfields School. There is also a footpath running between The Moorlands (the Victory School) and Moorfields School, which terminates at the verge.

The site to the south of the access drive is part of the recreation ground. It comprises a grassed area with a number of small trees planted within it. The land slopes down from Englishcombe Lane towards the access drive at a gradient of 1:1. Both sites have been protected from unauthorised parking by the installation of timber Knee Rails.

The proposal car parking involves creating 4 parking spaces on the verge and excavating the bank to the south, removing at least 6 trees and creating a further 16 parking spaces. It is proposed to plant 6 replacement trees within the open space. The land adjacent to this parking area would be regraded. A 1.8 m high chain link fence would continue around the car park.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

The Highway Development Officer has not objected to this proposal.

The Environmental Practice Team have expressed concern, that the proposal will have an unacceptable impact upon the landscape character of the Conservation Area. The site is also identified as public open space within the Bath Local Plan (adopted June 1997).

Their comments are as follows:

The gymnasium site has a harsh appearance and is incongruent in its context of an open space, school and predominantly residential area. There is now a marked imbalance between the proportion of buildings and hard vehicle areas to soft landscape treatment. The south and east sides adjacent to the gymnasium are adjacent to a school, the north and west sides adjacent to public open space. Car parking extends along the boundaries adjacent to the school - there is very little planting with no opportunities for more planting, so the cars are very prominent in views from the school.

There is virtually no on site planting at the south boundary either and any softening of this building relies on planting on the public open space. However planting is weak on this part of the open space, being limited to a number of small trees, which do not effectively screen the building. A hedge on the open space at this boundary would provide a more effective screen of the building, than individual trees, which become less effective at low level as they grow.

It is evident then that the poor on site landscape provision has been eroded through the building being extended and the parking spaces being added. The proposal now involves the erosion of the public open space. It involves the loss of open areas of grassland as well as 6 young but well established Ash trees. These Ash will require thinning soon, but it is possible to retain 3 to grow onto contribute to the landscape structure of the open space. The young Ash would make good replacements for the over mature Ash (T2) which is within the hedgerow.

The health of the Horse Chestnut (T1), a very large and significant tree in the park is threatened by proposed parking spaces 1-4, which are within the root area of the tree.

They do not support the proposal as they believe that it represents an unacceptable level of erosion of the open space. If a smaller number of spaces were allowed, damage to the Horse Chestnut could be avoided and parking directly beneath it could be avoided, which they strongly recommend. It would allow retention of the 6 young Ash and would be well clear of the roots of the magnificent Oak (T4).

They believe that an acceptable compromise would comprise the provision of half the number of spaces - by reducing the number from 20 to 10 spaces. This involves the omission of spaces no's 3 and 4, 10-13 and 17-20.

The submission of this application was accompanied by a petition, signed by 617 persons, supporting the need for additional on site parking. A further seven letters of support have been received stating that the current parking provision is inadequate. The letters also state that parents have been forced to park on Englishcombe Lane and walk down the drive, where there is no pavement, no lighting and the surface regularly becomes slippery, due to the presence of mud and leaves.

Two letters have been received, that object to the proposed parking areas. Both letters express concern about pedestrians using this recreation ground and children attending Moorlands School and The Victory School, based at The Moorlands. One letter objects to the loss of open space for parking and believes that any increase in vehicles using this lane would be detrimental to the parkland and contrary to Council policy of reducing the volume of traffic.

Councillor Griffiths has requested that this application be determined by the Committee.

PLANNING ISSUES

1. Planning History

An application for the erection of a hall for gymnastics and dancing was approved in April 1989. A revised proposal was approved in November 1989. The building was constructed in 1993.

An application to erect a two storey extension was permitted in August 1998.

2. Planning Policy

The site is situated within the Bath Conservation Area. Policy C4 is relevant in this instance.

The proposed car parking areas are situated within an area defined as Public Open Space. Within the Bath Local Plan, Policy LR3 is applicable.

There are a number of trees and hedgerow situated within, or immediately adjacent to, the proposed parking areas. Policy L4 is relevant to this application.

3. Environmental Impact

The area of verge to the north of the site does not relate to the rest of the public open space. However it is adjacent to a public footpath and established hedgerow, including a large Horse Chestnut tree. The hedgerow is a significant feature of the open space and its retention is essential. Environmental Practice are concerned that two of these spaces would be within the root area of the Horse Chestnut, which is unacceptable.

The area to the south clearly identifies with the open space. Due to the absence of planting around the site, the group of Ash trees represents the only planting adjacent to the building. It will contribute to the future character and appearance of the open space and their loss is undesirable. Providing 16 extra spaces in this area requires significant excavation of the bank and is likely to have significant impact when viewed from Englishcombe Lane. Such a change will have a detrimental impact upon appearance of the open space and landscape of this part of the Conservation Area. The application in its current form is considered to be unacceptable.

4. Highway Issues

At the time of the case officers site visit, the car park was full and 17 vehicles were parked alongside the access track to The Moorlands, within the area of open space. As the parking area to The Moorlands was not fully occupied, it is assumed that the extra vehicles related to patrons of the gymnasium. The Council has had to erect timber knee rails alongside the access track, to prevent cars parking within the grassed areas. The accessway is only 3.5 m wide with no pavement and the presence of the parked vehicles restricts space for other vehicles to pass and forces pedestrians onto the muddy verges.

There is also concern about the north parking area and its relationship to the public footpath. There needs to be a buffer strip to separate parked vehicles from the footpath between the schools. Given the number of primary age school children using this path, this area would need to be carefully laid out.

5. Revised Proposal

The gymnasium has an obvious parking problem. However scope to provide extra parking is very limited. The owners of the gymnasium must take some responsibility in the management of class timetables, to stagger pick up and drop off times and to control class numbers, to avoid the adverse impact upon the accessway and open space. Providing more parking spaces is not the only means of overcoming this problem.

The applicants have been advised that it may be possible to accommodate a more modest scheme in this area - providing spaces for 10 vehicles, as identified by the Environmental Practice Team. Two additional spaces could be provided to the north of the site, leaving an area for planting, to separate the parking area from the public footpath.

The alterations to the land to the south should be confined to the area directly adjacent to the access drive. It should not extend into the Ash trees. The engineering work would be less obvious and existing planting in this area would not be lost. Thereby the impact upon the open space would be minimised. Eight parking spaces could be created in this area, but areas of planting around the parking, will have to be provided.

CONCLUSION

If the scheme is revised in accordance with officers advice, the provision of 10 spaces with additional planting could be accommodated. However, no plans have yet been received.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to PERMIT subject to the receipt of amended drawings to reduce the no of spaces from 20-10, by deleting nos 3 and 4, 10-13 and 17-20, provision of planted areas adjoining the parking spaces, the retention of the group of Ash trees, and the following conditions:

1 No demolition, site works or clearance shall commence until protective fencing has been erected in accordance with details which have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details should show the style and position of fencing to be erected to protect trees, other vegetation or open space in accordance with BS 5837:1991. The fencing shall not be removed until the development is complete, except to carry out approved arboricultural or landscape works. There shall be no storage, excavations, level changes or other operations carried out within protected areas. Prohibited operations are fully described in the guidance notes attached to this decision notice.

REASON: To safeguard open space and to protect existing trees or other vegetation to be retained.

2 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00991/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 3rd Dec 1999

WARD Combe Down

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: New Era Housing Association

PROPOSAL: Erection of 1no. self contained unit after demolition of existing double garage

SITE LOCATION: 40 Gladstone Road Bath BA2 5HL

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The site is situated on the southern side of Gladstone Road at its eastern end. The application is to demolish a garage extension and replace it with a residential annexe on the western side of the property.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Engineering Services - Highways: Assuming sufficient car parking is available within the site (no details given), no highway objection raised.

Building Control: No comments but an application is required.

Local Residents: Objection raised on the following grounds:-

(i) The site has become overgrown and neglected.

(ii) House being extended in a Conservation Area.

(iii) No indication of car parking.

(iv) No tree surgery indicated.

(v) Fencing to footpath needs replacing.

(vi) Increased capacity from previous permission.

(vii) New access doors alongside neighbouring residential property.

(viii) Boiler extract vents discharging toward neighbouring property.

(ix) Twenty-four hour care will result in increased activity on site in front of local residential property.

(x) Proposed pitched roof will be intrusive to neighbouring resident.

(xi) Application should involve the fire officer and social services.

Local School: Objection raised on the grounds that the site is adjacent to their Pre-preparatory school with its adjoining Junior School Chapel. The site use appears to be for the use of special needs patients. The development may have an adverse effect on pupils and staff, and wish to be assured that this development is suitable for this specific site.

PLANNING ISSUES

History: In April 1994 planning permission was granted for the change of use of this property to a Care Home. The property had at that time been run as a care home which was run by the Local Authority for some six years.

Present Application: The present application is to demolish the existing attached garage and build a small residential annexe in its place. The property appears to have been used as a respite home for people with learning difficulties. Apparently residents would stay there for two to twelve days to allow their usual carers a break. The proposed usage would be for the provision of permanent homes again for people with learning disabilities but with the majority of them also having major physical disabilities. This new scheme would, as before, be staffed on a round the clock basis in order to provide the necessary level of care and support required by these patients. The bungalow would as extended, house four residents with two members of staff in attendance It is anticipated that there would be a maximum of two staff vehicles together with one transport vehicle. The original permission of April 1994 called for five car parking spaces, and if this requirement was maintained, it would allow two extra spaces for visitors. The applicant has indicated that the property was vacated in early summer 1998, and since that time the grounds appear to have received little attention. Assurances have however been given that this mater will be attended to shortly.

The objections raised by the school, and by the local resident in a letter to Social Services, questions the suitability of the property for use as a care home, and it is hoped to have comments from Social Services regarding this in time for meeting.

CONCLUSION

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to PERMIT subject to the receipt of no adverse consultations and with the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

REASON: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2 The annexe hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the proposed five car parking spaces have been provided and these shall be permanently retained for the parking of vehicles used by the occupiers of the building or visitors to the property.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01109/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 27th Jan 2000

WARD Bathwick

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Mr B D Campbell

PROPOSAL: Erection of single storey extension to rear and extension to front of garage

SITE LOCATION: 10 St Marys Close Bath BA2 6BR

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

St Mary's Close is a cul-de-sac situated off St Ann's Way which leads from Bathwick Hill, and comprises semi-detached and detached houses constructed in the 1950's. No. 10 St Mary's Close is a semi-detached house situated at the end of the cul-de-sac and has its rear garden dropping down to the Kennet and Avon Canal.

The proposal involves the demolition of an existing utility room at the rear of the house and the construction of a single storey extension to create a new kitchen. This extension will extend 4 ms from the rear of the house and will be a little under 4 ms in width. The existing kitchen will be converted to a dining room. The lounge will also be extended at the rear but its projection is only 1.2 ms from the house and will be about 300 mm from the boundary with No. 11 St Mary's Close. Steps will lead down from the patio doors to the extended lounge to the level of the existing patio area which will be extended to provide a footpath to a tiled deck in front of the kitchen extension. A 2 m high timber fence is also shown to be erected along the boundary with No. 11 St Mary's Close for a length of 5.4 ms. This fence will abutt an existing beech hedge belonging to the neighbour and which is about 2.4 ms high.

The proposal also involves extending the existing garage to the side of the house forward by one metre.

The application described above is a second revision to that originally submitted. When first submitted the proposal showed a large timber deck area to the rear of the extended lounge and the new boundary fence was not proposed. This scheme was first revised to reduce the size of the timber deck, to include the erection of the boundary fence and to reduce the amount of glazing in the door to the new kitchen. More recently the proposal has been revised to omit the timber deck area.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

No adverse comments have been received from consultees.

The residents of the adjoining house at No. 11 St Mary's Close have objected to the proposal as originally submitted. They state that the extension is far too close to their house and will deprive them of morning and afternoon sun and darken their living room. The proposal will also deprive them of their privacy, emphasised by the elevated nature of the work and there will also be a noise element. They will also lose their privacy because a kitchen window and door will face in their direction. It is also pointed out that the rear gardens of houses in this part of the close run at an angle from the rear of the house.

These neighbours have been advised of the first revision which reduced the size of the timber deck area, reduced the glazing in the kitchen door and showed the erection of a boundary fence. In response to this they have re-iterated their objections with particular reference to the raised deck, the windows facing in their direction and the windows in the extended lounge. The neighbours have now been notified of the latest revisions and my further comments will be reported at the meeting.

PLANNING ISSUES

There is no objection in principle to the proposed works in relation to their effect on the appearance of the building and therefore the main issue is how it affects the amenities of the neighbours at No. 11 St Mary's Close. In this respect it should be noted that the lounge extension will extend a little over one metre from the rear of the house to align with and existing covered and raised area at the rear of the neighbours house. It will be 300 mm from the boundary with the neighbour. The existing beech hedge already helps provide privacy between the two properties and it is not considered that this limited extension will adversely affect the neighbour.

With regard to the windows and door to the proposed kitchen extension which will face the neighbours property the Committee should note that the nearest point of the windows to the neighbours boundary is about 3.5 ms, the windows relate to a ground floor level extension and the existing hedge already provides privacy. In these circumstances again it is not considered that there will be an adverse effect on the neighbours, and it should be noted that the applicant also proposes to erect a 2 m high timber fence to help ensure privacy.

CONCLUSION

The revised drawings are considered acceptable and it is recommended that planning permission is granted.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

1 No development shall commence until a schedule of materials and finishes, and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including roofs, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out only in accordance with the details so approved.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

FOOTNOTE: This permission refers only to the location plan and drawing nos. 1275/01 date stamped 24 November 1999, 1275/03 date stamped 13 December 1999 and 1275/02C date stamped 9 March 2000.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00984/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 24th Dec 1999

WARD Kingsmead

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: B G Cooper (Melksham) Ltd

PROPOSAL: Erection of cold store at rear (retrospective application)

SITE LOCATION: 6 Chelsea Road Bath BA1 3DU

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The property is situated on the east side of Chelsea Road, almost opposite its junction with Park Road. It is mid terrace, comprising a retail store with ancillary accommodation above. There is a service yard to the rear, which accommodates open storage, a plant room and cold store. The yard is bounded on its north side by a brick wall topped by fencing panels, and on its east and south sides by a chain link fence. The eastern boundary abuts the rear of residential properties in Newbridge Hill.

This application is retrospective and relates to a cold store sited within the rear service yard. It is a prefabricated unit, with a clad metal finish and with a flat roof of felt and chippings. It occupies the north-west corner of the yard, between the boundary wall and the canopy over the main rear doors.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Building Control: advise that the applicant contact them with regard to the submission of a Building Regulation application.

Environmental Health: consider that the noise levels from the cold store are not significant, and raise no objection.

A letter received from a neighbouring resident expresses concern at the disturbance caused, not by the cold store itself, but rather by the general activity within the service yard - particularly in the early morning and late evening.

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History

The application is the result of investigation following a complaint that the cold store had been sited.

Policy Context

Policies C2 and C4 relate to design, and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Policy H15 relates to the amenities of residential properties.

Policy R9 seeks to sustain suburban shopping centres.

Design/Scale

This prefabricated unit is simple in design, and modest in scale. In the context of the store building and its associated structures, this simple approach is considered appropriate. Indeed, to embellish the unit in any way would likely increase its scale and impact.

Residential Amenities

This is an established area of mixed retail and residential accommodation. The representation received relates more specifically to general activity in the rear service yard. Whilst it could be argued that the introduction of a further storage facility may increase levels of activity, it is unlikely to be significant in real terms. Current levels of activity are, in this case, beyond the scope of planning controls. In respect of the current proposal, Environmental Health raise no objection. It must be concluded therefore that the proposal would not significantly harm the existing amenities of nearby residential properties. Notwithstanding the above, it is perhaps appropriate to advise the applicant of concerns expressed in relation to their deliveries.

CONCLUSION

This cold store unit preserves the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area; and does not itself significantly harm the residential amenities of nearby properties.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

ADVICE NOTE: The applicant is advised of concerns expressed by neighbours in relation to disturbance caused by early morning and late evening deliveries.

FOOTNOTE: This refusal relates to drawing no 99/25 1 and site plan date stamped 28 September 1999.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00141/LBA TYPE Listed Building Consent (Alts/exts)

EXPIRY DATE 22nd Mar 2000

WARD Lansdown

Listed Building Grade I

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Karl Jaeger Esq

PROPOSAL: External alterations to rebuilding garage walls, boundary wall and gates

SITE LOCATION: 7 Upper Lansdown Mews Bath BA1 5HG

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

7 Upper Lansdown Mews comprises a mews cottage and a former garage (now demolished) and courtyard. The stone boundary wall and gates to the mews have collapsed. The building is listed by curtilage connection to the main house in Lansdown Crescent.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Engineering Services - no comments

Private Sector Renewal - no comments

Building Control - no observations

No representations have been received

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History

Report to Development Control sub Committee 26 November 1999. Members will recall that a report was considered which discussed the implications of the unauthorised demolition of the garage walls and the collapse of the front boundary walls and gates. It was agreed that certain options should be investigated, and that a report would be made to the PT&E Committee on the subject.

Planning Permission is required, and an application is expected.

Local Plan Policies

Policies C1, C2, C3, C4, C11, C12, C13 and C15 of the Bath Local Plan are relevant to the determination of this application.

Character and Setting of Listed Building

The proposed works will restore the garage walls to their appearance before the unauthorised demolition, but the structure will be remain unroofed. The new gates and boundary walls and the rebuilding of the garage walls will enhance the setting of the main Grade 1 building and secure the site. The applicant has been encouraged to consider completing the garage roof and the agent states that a further submission is being considered.

Character and Appearance of this part of the Bath Conservation Area

The present condition of the site is detrimental to the setting of the mews. The proposed walls and gates will enclose the site and improve the appearance of the surrounding area. The new gates will be solid painted timber; they were previously open slats.

Reason for Application being reported to Committee

Request from Councillor, and previous enforcement report.

CONCLUSION

The works will restore the site to its former appearance and improve the appearance of the area.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be submitted to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions for determination confirming that the proposed works have the support of the Council's Development Control Sub-Committee subject to the following conditions:-

1 All external walling materials to be used for the garage walls shall match those of the original structure in respect of type, size, colour, pointing, coursing, jointing, profile and texture as shown on the submitted photographs nos2740.01/03.

REASON: To safeguard the character and appearance of the Listed Building and/or the Conservation Area.

FOOTNOTE: This consent applies to the following documents: letter from David Kent Architects, letter from Brand Leonard, drawing numbers 2740.01/01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, L07, 08, 09

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00771/OUT TYPE Outline Application

EXPIRY DATE 8th Oct 1999

WARD Bathwick

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Favager

PROPOSAL: Erection of two dwellings

SITE LOCATION: Car Park Adjoining All Saints Place Bath BA2 6DU

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The application is made, in outline, for development of a triangular shaped area of land on the south side of Claverton Down Road between an access to modest scale flats in Retford House and the driveway into the caravan park. The site has a frontage to Claverton Down Road of 40 metres and a depth of 25 metres.

The site has been used in the past as a car park and there have been planning permissions for stationing a "mobile dwelling" and for use as a car and caravan park. The floor of the site is below Claverton Down Road, approximately two to three metres lower. The frontage to Claverton Down Road includes a number of self sown sycamore trees and there are mature trees including a tree of heaven and a purple norway maple on the east boundary.

The outline application is for two dwellings. None of the details are submitted for approval but an illustrative drawing has been submitted. This shows houses, one of three bedrooms and the other of four, on three levels having vehicular access off All Saints Place but showing pedestrian access at first floor level to Claverton Down Road.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Highway Engineering observations are anticipated. Strategic Policy, have advised that the trees which are on the Claverton Down Road and east frontages are not likely to be retained with the illustrative scheme submitted. The trees on the Claverton Down Road frontage would be unlikely to survive the back filling which is suggested and the trees on the eastside would be partly occupied by the house proposed at that end of the site. A tree survey would be necessary if a permission were given.

Representations

Nearby residents point out that details of the site would be lost by the proposal. The existing stone wall would be lost onto Claverton Down Road as well as existing trees. The loss of details such as this in the Conservation Area are not considered acceptable. The scheme presented appears to be overdevelopment of the site and the buildings would be more intrusive than existing houses in All Saints Place.

Development along the road has an existing building line which is well back behind gardens and verges. The proposals illustrated show houses which are too far forward of this line and would therefore be intrusive. The retained trees and the view across the former quarry to All Saints Place cottages help to retain the present, pleasant, natural and uncongested feel of the neighbourhood and an agreeable outlook from existing houses.

A resident points out that the inclusion of footway access to Claverton Down Road would be likely to encourage occasional car parking on the road frontage. This occurs at present as a result of a BT call box in the road and it causes dangers. The prospect is for more traffic in the area and therefore this will bring about a more difficult context in terms of traffic flow.

PLANNING ISSUES

There are no objections in principle to residential development on this site.

There are some principles that are desirable for this site and, these are suggested as follows:-

. this site was part of a quarry and the sense of space that remains at present from the excavation provides variety in the area and reflects something of the historic character of Claverton Down; this should be maintained;

. to achieve this development should be set back from Claverton Road, not imposing or intruding in front of the building line;

. any development should relate to the scale of All Saints Place down at the quarry level; the three floored homes illustrated cannot be seen to relate to this scale;

. trees on frontages should be retained if possible;

. the existing stone boundary walls should be retained so that the enclosure of the space is maintained;

. all access, pedestrian and vehicular should be from All Saints Place only.

The boundary of the Conservation Area is Claverton Down Road and this has to be taken into account in considering suitable development on this site. Policy C2 of the Bath Local Plan does require however that development in Bath should be sensitive to and compatible with the scale, height, bulk and character of the surroundings. It is suggested that the above principles would assist the aims of this policy to be achieved.

Taking account of these requirements and in response to the illustrative schedule it appears unlikely that two houses can be accommodated on this site. Certainly in the absence of a detailed scheme that demonstrates that appropriate development in keeping with the character of the area can be carried out without being a potential cause of danger or inconvenience due to generated traffic this present proposal is not acceptable.

CONCLUSION

The proposal submitted for two houses on this site can only be regarded as overdevelopment of the site if desirable criteria enabling development to be compatible with the character of the area are maintained. This appears necessary in the absence of a detailed scheme which is in character with the area.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE

1 The proposal for two houses on the application site is overdevelopment of the space available because it appears to prejudice the desirable standards of design stated by Policy C2 of the Local Plan requiring development to be sensitive to and compatible with the scale, height, bulk and character of the surroundings.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00166/LBA TYPE Listed Building Consent (Alts/exts)

EXPIRY DATE 23rd Mar 2000

WARD Kingsmead

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Bath Environment Centre

PROPOSAL: Display of internal sign to vaulted area over south platform (No.2) and external hanging sign to the vaults on Midland Bridge Road (No.1)

SITE LOCATION: Green Park Station Green Park Road Bath BA1 1JB

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The new Environment Centre, now re-branded as "Evolve" has relocated to the vaults within Green Park Station and immediately adjacent to Midland Bridge Road.

Signage is required both within the station building and the public face onto Midland Bridge Road.

The signage within the station will be sign written timber boarding fixed to the existing timber balustrading, adjacent to the steps down from the platform to the basement level, with two additional timber signs fixed to adjacent iron columns. The building is listed Grade II in recognition of its special architectural and historic interest.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Objections have been received from the Federation of Bath Residents' Association and The Green Park Residents' Association. They are concerned about the size of the signage on the platform, signage on the Midland Bridge Road elevation and the placing of an 'A' board on the pavement.

PLANNING ISSUES

In order to reduce the impact of the signage on the Midland Bridge Road elevation , it has been agreed that the proposed hanging sign will now be replaced by a flat timber sign fixed directly into the walling adjacent to the entrance.

It is considered that the proposed signage located within the Green Park Station is acceptable in that it is to be sign written constructed of timber and located within the existing timber balustrading thereby giving logic to the size and design.

CONCLUSION

In the process of negotiations attention has been drawn to the inconvenience of locating an 'A' board out on the pavement and this will not now re-occur. The situation will be improved by the location of the proposed signage which will remove the need for such street clutter.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to CONSENT subject to the receipt of satisfactory revised plans.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00993/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 17th Dec 1999

WARD Weston

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs J Lascelles

PROPOSAL: Erection of a conservatory

SITE LOCATION: Garden Flat Vale Lodge Weston Park West Bath BA1 4AR

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

Vale Lodge is a Victorian Lodge, set in spacious grounds sited within the designated Conservation Area of Bath. The Lodge has been converted into four self-contained flats.

This application relates to the erection of a conservatory to be erected on the front of the property in association with the ground floor flat. It is to be constructed of a painted wood frame on a natural Bathstone plinth.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Building Control Services - No observations

Private Sector Renewal - No observations

Engineering Services - No observations

Neighbours - One letter has been received raising concern that the design should allow access to the windows above for cleaning and maintenance purposes.

The Bath Society - state that it is a pity to paint hardwood.

PLANNING ISSUES

Relevant Planning History

Planning permissions were granted in 1959 and 1994 in respect of the conversion of the Lodge into four self-contained flats.

None in relation to this proposal.

Planning Issues and Relevant Policies

Impact, in terms of its scale and design upon the character and appearance of the Victorian Lodge and this part of the Conservation Area - Policies C1 - C4 inclusive.

Impact upon the amenities of adjoining occupiers - Policy H15

Planning Considerations

Vale Lodge is a Victorian Lodge, set in spacious grounds. Whilst it has suffered from a number of inappropriate additions/extensions in the past, it nonetheless retains its intrinsic character.

The property has a projecting bay on this front elevation which runs through the first, second and third floors and is a particular design feature. The proposed conservatory is to be erected under this bay. In view of its excessive width however it uncharacteristically projects beyond the confines of the bay and consequently its roof is off centre. Rather than respect the general proportions and verticality of this building it is considered that the conservatory would instead be an incongruous addition. Whilst negotiations have taken place with the agent on behalf of the applicant in order to reduce the scale of the proposed conservatory the revised (current plans) show only a marginal reduction. It is the applicants intention to use the conservatory as a kitchen and any reduction in its size is not considered desirable.

Sited it is on the front of Vale Lodge the proposed conservatory would be visible from public view.

It is considered that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the amenities of adjoining residents by reason of overlooking, overshadowing etc.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE

1 The proposed conservatory, by reason of its siting, scale and design, would represent an incongruous addition to this Victorian Lodge and would therefore have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of this part of the designated Bath Conservation Area. As such it would be contrary to Policies C1 - C4 (inclusive) of the adopted Bath Local Plan.

FOOTNOTE: This refusal relates to the site location plan submitted to the Local Planning Authority on 7 October 1999 and drawing no's 1332.4a/6a/8a and floorplan submitted to the Local Planning Authority on 27 January 2000.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00234/REG03 TYPE Regulation 3 Application

EXPIRY DATE 31st Mar 2000

WARD Westmoreland

Floodland

APPLICANT: Bath And North East Somerset Council

PROPOSAL: Construction of a gabion retaining wall and alterations to existing site levels (Retrospective application)

SITE LOCATION: Argyle Works Lower Bristol Road Bath BA2 3DB

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The site is situated on southern side of the Lower Bristol Road and was a builders' yard. It is now used by this Authority's Highway Maintenance Service. The application is for the retention of a gabion retaining wall to the south east corner of the site adjoining 23 Vernon Terrace and 37 Inverness Road.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Engineering Services - Highways: No comment.

Building Control: No operation.

Private Sector Renewal: No observation.

PLANNING ISSUES

The site is cut into the rising ground on the southern side of the Lower Bristol Road, and adjoining properties to the south and east of the site could be at risk from subsidence. In order to safeguard the adjoining residential properties. The work has been carried out and is in natural stone and is acceptable. No comments have been received from the adjoining residents.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

FOOTNOTE: This permission relates to drawing numbers: 96106-11; 96106-12; 961506-13; 961506-14, 5571/1/2; 5571/1/3 all date stamped 1st February 2000.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01085/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 14th Jan 2000

WARD Oldfield

APPLICANT: Mr A Russell & Ms S Bailey

PROPOSAL: Erection of a kitchen extension at the rear

SITE LOCATION: 21 Sladebrook Avenue Bath BA2 2LB

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The application site is situated in a terrace of houses on the west side of the road, amongst nos 19-43 Sladebrook Avenue. Coronation Avenue is situated to the North of the Avenue, with Englishcombe Lane to the South. The property is a large Victorian two storey dwellinghouse of Ashlar construction.

The proposal involves demolishing the existing lean to conservatory and replacing it with a blockwork structure, to form an extension to the existing kitchen. The proposal has been revised to include a glazed roof, rather than the felt roof originally proposed.

The application is submitted by or on behalf of an employee/ex employee of Bath and North East Somerset Council, their spouse or partner.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

No relevant observations have been received from Consultees.

Two letters of representation have been received from neighbouring properties. One letter supports the proposal and raises no objections. The other letter is concerned that the extension would make the kitchen and dining room to the neighbouring property extremely dark, forcing the occupant to keep the lights on all day. He realises that there is a conservatory on the proposed building area but it is glazed which allows light through and not solid walling, as proposed.

PLANNING ISSUES

1. Site History

No previous planning applications have been made in respect of this property. However the property does have a single storey flat roofed utility room extension to the rear and a dormer window in the rear roofslope. These extensions were constructed as permitted development.

2. Policy Context

The following policies of the Bath Local Plan (adopted June 1997) are considered relevant:

Policy H15 – Residential amenity.

Policy C2 - High Standard of Design.

3. Siting and Design

The proposed extension is situated in the same position as the existing conservatory, on the boundary with No.20 Sladebrook Avenue. However, the proposed extension is smaller than the existing structure - it is the same width, but whereas the conservatory is 4.7m in length, the proposed kitchen extension is only 3.4m. The proposed structure would be constructed from reconstructed Bath stone faced blockwork and has been amended to include a glazed roof.

4. Relationship to 20 Sladebrook Avenue

The neighbour is concerned that the extension will overshadow his kitchen and dining room windows. The rear elevation of these properties face west. The original two storey wing at the rear of no.21 already overshadows no.20 - a situation which is further compounded by no.20 being set 0.2m lower than no.21.

The proposed extension is smaller than the conservatory. It is unlikely to create additional overshadowing for no.20 and at 3.4m in length has lesser impact than the conservatory. There will be a slight change in outlook but this needs to be balanced against the improved privacy, to the neighbouring occupiers.

CONCLUSION

The existing timber conservatory is in a very poor state of repair. The replacement with a smaller extension will enhance the appearance of the rear elevation. On balance, the change in outlook is unlikely to create further adverse overshadowing to the neighbouring property, in a situation where the two storey wing has always overshadowed this area.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

1 All external walling materials to be used shall match those of the existing building in respect of type, size, colour, pointing, coursing, jointing, profile and texture.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

FOOTNOTE: This permission relates to drawings numbered SA/OP/1 and /2 date stamped 1 November 1999, 2 x colour photographs of rear elevation date stamped 1 November 1999 and revised roof detail date stamped 8 February 2000 only.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01121/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 28th Jan 2000

WARD Oldfield

APPLICANT: Mr &Mrs J Hawkins

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 2 storey extension, new entrance lobby and conservatory after demolition of existing kitchen/bathroom, and entrance porch, and formation of new vehicular access to highway

SITE LOCATION: 187 Englishcombe Lane Bath BA2 2EW

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

This property is a two-storey detached house situated on the south side of Englishcombe Lane opposite Sladebrook Court. It is constructed out of natural stone with a tiled roof and is partially screened from the road by a hedge and trees. There is currently no off street parking for this house.

The accommodation within the house comprises two living rooms, a kitchen and bathroom at ground floor level with two bedrooms at first floor level.

The proposal is essentially to double the size of the accommodation by constructing a two-storey rear extension of the same size and style as the existing house and in materials to match. A conservatory will also be constructed at the rear of the house and a new front porch will be erected. A new vehicular access will also be formed onto Englishcombe Lane with about half of the front garden being set out as a parking/turning area. This will involve the removal of a section of hedge and five trees.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

The Highway Engineer was originally concerned about the inadequate on-site parking and turning provision and the lack of visibility onto the road. However, revised drawing have been received which overcome these concerns.

Bath Preservation Trust has objected to this proposal. The Trust considers the proposals excessive and not an enhancement to this small detached Victorian cottage. The proposals would more than double the size of the existing property, drastically altering the character of this small Victorian house for the worse. In this area, where there has been considerable modern development out towards the countryside, the radical alteration of surviving period properties should be strongly resisted.

PLANNING ISSUES

The main issue relating to this proposal is it's effect on the appearance of the building. The existing house sits within a large mature garden and it is not considered unreasonable to extend it to provide a four bedroom detached house. It will be extended at the rear, in materials to match the existing house, and of a similar style to that of the existing house. With the space that will remain around the house when extended it will not appear cramped on the site or have an adverse effect on its neighbours. The site is not in the Conservation Area and neither is the building a listed building. There is modern development adjoining and opposite the site and taking into account the appearance of the proposed extension the comments of Bath Preservation Trust in this instance cannot be supported.

The trees that will be lost as a result of the new access and parking area are Laburnum and Cypress trees which are considered by the Councils Arboricultural Officer to have a low landscape value.

CONCLUSION

It is considered that the proposed extension, whilst doubling the size of the existing house does not harm the appearance of the building and should therefore be granted planning permission.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

1 All the external walling shall be natural stone to match the existing house.

REASON: In the interest of the appearance of the development.

2 Prior to the commencement of development, a sample panel of all external walling materials to be used shall be erected on site, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and kept on site for reference until the development is completed.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

3 All external roofing materials to be used shall match those of the existing house in respect of size, material, colour, texture and profile.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

4 The parking/turning area and the vehicular access shall not be brought into use until they have been set out completely in accordance with the approved drawings. The parking/turning area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles associated with the development.

REASON: In the interest of highway safety.

5 No site works or clearance shall be commenced until protective fences which conform with British Standard 5837:1991 have been erected around any existing trees and other existing or proposed landscape areas in positions which have previously been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Until the development has been completed these fences shall not be removed and the protected areas are to be kept clear of any building, plant, material, debris and trenching, with the existing ground levels maintained, and there shall be no entry to those areas except for arboricultural or landscape works.

REASON: To safeguard the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

6 Prior to the commencement of any form of site works or clearance the Local Planning Authority shall be given not less than two weeks notice in writing of these works to ensure that appropriate measures of landscape protection required under condition 5 have been implemented in accordance with the approved plans or conditions.

REASON: To ensure that adequate protection is given to the areas to be landscaped and the existing trees and planting to be retained within the site.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00081/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 10th Mar 2000

WARD Lansdown

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs P Hubball

PROPOSAL: Erection of a three storey side extension

SITE LOCATION: 39 Fairfield Avenue Bath BA1 6NJ

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

The property is situated on the north side of Fairfield Avenue, at its junction with Wiltshire Way. It is semi detached, circa 1960, constructed of reconstructed Bath stone with a gabled roof of slates. The plot rises steeply from front (south) to back (north), the garden to the side having been terraced to create a raised level lawn. Consequently, ground floor level is considerably higher than the level of the adjacent highway - the front door being accessed via a cranked flight of stairs.

The front gardens of Fairfield Avenue are well planted and are therefore essentially 'soft' in character. A number of its properties have in the past been extended. The properties in Wiltshire Way, to the rear, are orientated east-west, with views from their gardens across Fairfield Avenue.

It is proposed to extend the building to the side, utilising the dramatic change in levels to provide a garage in an undercroft below extended ground and first floors.

The front elevation would be set back behind the front wall of the existing house, producing a ridge height slightly lower than existing. Materials generally would match those of the existing property.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

A letter has been received from neighbours to the rear, in Wiltshire Way. It expresses concern at the overall height, and the resulting impact on the outlook from the rear of their property. They suggest that the proposal be reduced from 3 to 2 storeys in height, and that the original development had regard to the relationship between properties.

PLANNING ISSUES

Policy Context

Policy C2 relates to high design standards, having regard to appropriate scale, materials, detailing, etc.

Policy H15 relates to residential amenities, and the need to essentially preserve those of existing occupiers.

Design

The overall design reflects that of the surrounding area - utilising forms, materials and detailing which are common throughout. Whilst the garage to the lower ground floor is more unusual, this element will not have great impact given its relationship to adjacent ground levels and as long as the opportunity is taken for appropriate complementary landscape works.

Residential Amenities

The properties in this area enjoy, for the most part, open aspects afforded by significant changes in level.

Whilst the concerns of the neighbour to the rear are noted, Members will be aware that the desire to preserve a private view is not in itself a material planning consideration. The neighbour's view would change as a result of the proposal, but there would be no significant overbearing, overlooking or loss of privacy. Accordingly, the amenities of neighbouring properties would not be significantly harmed in planning terms.

CONCLUSION

The proposal reflects the detail and characteristics of the surrounding area, and cannot be considered to materially harm the amenities of nearby properties. Further information and revised details have been requested in order to demonstrate the extent to which the garage level can be incorporated into the garden setting. Members will be advised if such details are received in time for the meeting; in the meantime the following recommendation is made.

RECOMMENDATION

Authorise the Head of Planning and Development Services to PERMIT subject to the receipt of satisfactory revised and further details relating to the vehicular access in the context of the garden setting; and the following conditions:

1 All external walling and roofing materials to be used shall match those of the existing building in respect of type, size, colour, pointing, coursing, jointing, profile and texture.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the surrounding area.

2 The garage(s) hereby approved shall be retained for the garaging of private motor vehicles associated with the dwelling and ancillary domestic storage and for no other purpose without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To retain adequate off-street parking provision.

3 All hard and/or soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants indicated on the approved scheme which, within a period of five years from the date of the development being completed, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced during the next planting season with other trees or plants of a species and size to be first approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All hard landscape works shall be permanently retained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure that the landscape scheme is implemented and maintained.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 00/00229/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 30th Mar 2000

WARD Combe Down

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs J Hicks

PROPOSAL: Erection of a first floor extension at the rear

SITE LOCATION: 3 Green Cottages Combe Down Bath BA2 5HG

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

Green Cottages are situated on the eastern side of Tyning Road. The proposed first floor flat roofed extension would be at the rear of the premises on its northern side.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Engineering Services - Highways: No comment.

Building Control: The existing property is built over the mines. Existing foundation to be used if suitable.

Private Sector Renewal: No observations

PLANNING ISSUES

The property is one of a terrace of small miners' cottages which runs almost due east/west from Tyning Road. Most have been extended in a similar manner to this proposal. The next door extension is typical and is built of stone faced block; the floor levels appearing at a higher level at the rear.

This proposal therefore, which would normally be unacceptable in a Conservation Area, is difficult to resist in this particular location, having regard to the existing extensions on the remainder of the terrace. The applicant is willing to use natural stone in lieu of the stone faced block, which would go some way to making the proposals acceptable.

CONCLUSION

In view of the existing development on this terrace, it would be difficult to resist the present proposal.

RECOMMENDATION

PERMIT

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission.

REASON: As required by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2 The external stonework to be used shall be to match that of the existing building in respect of type, size, colour, pointing, coursing, jointing, profile and texture.

REASON: In the interests of the appearance of the development and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/00903/OUT TYPE Outline Application

EXPIRY DATE 18th Nov 1999

WARD Odd Down Ward

APPLICANT: Caldecotte Consultants & Ushers Of Trowbridge

PROPOSAL: Erection of 1 no. bungalow (Outline application - re-submission).

SITE LOCATION: Land Rear Of The Rose And Laurel Car Park Rush Hill Bath

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

This proposal concerns a site of approximately 0.1 hectare of an open site behind and above the Rose and Laurel public house car park. The site also has a frontage of approximately 90 metres to the length of the Rush Hill lane above the main road in front of houses numbered 122 to 128. The site has been used as allotments in the past but has remained unused for some time.

The application is in outline and does not specify any matters such as siting or design to be determined at this stage. Drawings are submitted, for information only, of a three bedroom and study bungalow. The applicants are submitting a revised proposal following an earlier refusal for two houses and consider this proposal is more sensitive to the surroundings, because:

(1) with one bungalow less frontage is affected and therefore a reduced length of boundary wall needs to be demolished;

(2) a single storey house will reduce the possibility of overlooking and obstructing views of existing houses; and

(3) as there are fewer houses proposed there is even less chance that there will be a highway objection to the proposal. The applicant concluded that the highway engineers had no objection to the earlier proposal and that this section of Rush Hill serving the site is an adopted road. Residents object to this statement very strongly and state that it is a private road which has only become surfaced as a result of their own expenditure.

The applicant has appealed to the Secretary of State because the Council has not reached a decision within eight weeks. Therefore the Committee are requested to consider the merits of the application and record the decision they would have taken.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

Building Control advise that a level threshold is required to the front door.

The Highway Engineering Service have not yet commented on this application. They have been asked to confirm if the advice given for the last application would apply to this proposal. The opinion given at that time required that:-

the site should include provision for on-site turning,

there should be the provision of a turning head between the application site and the end of the lane,

the lane should be widened to a width of 4.5 metres along the frontage of the developed site, and

widening of the main part of Rush Hill to allow two vehicles to pass.

Only with these matters provided for would there be no highway objection.

Representations

Seventeen letters of objection have been received from surrounding residents. The objections to the proposed bungalow are because of the inadequacy of the present access in various ways, the effect on the character of the area that would result from the bungalow being built and providing access to the standard required by highways and the effect on the amenities of surrounding residents.

The access is regarded as unsatisfactory and unsuitable for any additional traffic in three respects:-

(1) At the junction with the main road the access is considered very limited and difficult to turn into across often fast moving traffic;

(2) The initial entrance to the lane is often considered difficult due to its narrowness and steepness. It can be dangerous when icy, it is too narrow for cars to pass and if vehicles are parked on the hill (this can be made more likely if the public house car park is crowded) this also slows entrance and access to this section of Rush Hill, and

(3) The lane is only one car width; residents have contrived hard standings in front of and parallel to their houses and on the other side there is the stone wall on the applicants land. Any delivery vehicles have considerable difficulty turning in the lane or of reversing out. Another property would only increase the congestion.

Residents believe the character of the area will be significantly altered by the measures that would be necessary to provide access to the proposed bungalow and by the siting of the bungalow itself. Providing a turning area to highway design standards and widening Rush Hill lane to allow vehicles to pass would encroach onto the open frontage of the site and remove the existing stone walls. The present residents have adjusted to the inconvenience so that the character of the area can be retained but this proposal does not accept these limitations.

Residents also consider that their amenity will be affected by the proposal. The proposal is for a bungalow but residents still believe that their panoramic views will be obstructed. The proximity of the bungalow to existing houses also suggests that residents will be overlooked. The bungalow shown on the illustrative plans is considered to be out of character with the area.

One resident strongly refutes the applicant's contention that the lane is adopted. Other residents state that it is a private road and has been surfaced at their own expense.

PLANNING ISSUES

Planning Issues

These include the history of the site, the safety of the access, the effect on the character of the area and the effect on local resident's amenity. In addition it may be questioned if sufficient details have been submitted that indicate the full impact of the proposal.

History

Outline schemes submitted in 1964 for residential development, for three houses in 1975 and for two houses in 1999 have all been refused permission. Earlier refusals were given because of the unsatisfactory access and inadequate drainage. The most recent refusal also stated the unsatisfactory access as a reason, the unsatisfactory effect on amenity and on the character of the area.

Access

The three aspects of the access discussed by the residents who have written making objection are significant factors detracting from the proposal submitted.

The Government's advice in Planning Policy Guidance No.13 advises that accesses onto roads should wherever possible be on level ground, where there is good visibility and not near the crest of a hill. The access from Rush Hill Lane onto Rush Hill, the main road, can be criticised on all these aspects. The steepness of the entrance section of Rush Hill Lane inhibits entering vehicles from awaiting vehicles making an exit at the same time and weather conditions can also make this difficult. The one car width of the lane and the quite inadequate space to turn also confirms the complete unsuitability of Rush Hill Lane to accept the additional traffic that might be generated by the application. The proposal as presented without improvements to the access included as part of the application could not be recommended to be permitted.

Character of the Area

The most obvious impact to the character of the area from the proposal would be the loss of the open space in front of the houses off Rush Hill Lane. The residents would no longer enjoy uninterrupted views. A bungalow would be less obstructive to views but would still remove the sense of space in front of the houses. The application is an outline proposal and does not specify design but a large bungalow is shown on submitted drawings. It is considered that this would not be in character with the property in the lane at present.

As an outline application the potential effect of a detailed scheme has to be considered. This would have to recognise the Highway Engineering requirements that have been stated. Widening the lane and providing a turning head would certainly alter the appearance and character of the space defined by the houses in the lane. If the lane is made wider it could be expected that when the public house car park is congested there will be the possibility that cars will park in the lane; perhaps reducing it to its present width.

Amenity

This application is in outline and therefore no details are requiring approval at this stage. Nearby residents are concerned that any house built on the application site will be close to them and affect their privacy by overlooking. It would be possible to design in such a way that this should not occur.

The amenity that would be affected by a bungalow in this position is that of loss of view. There would be less obstruction than that presented by two houses in the last application but the appearance of the area would be significantly altered.

CONCLUSION

There is no doubt that the access to the applicant's site is below reasonable highway design standards and that developing the application site without substantial improvements would add to the congestion which can occur and put safety at greater risk.

The applicant could widen the lane and provide a turning head by making use of some of the site area. This would not improve the junction onto Rush Hill or provide a wider waiting area at the foot of the lane. In the process of doing this the appearance and character of the area would be substantially altered.

As it is likely that an additional house off this lane would generate more traffic and increase potential risks at the junction even if road improvements were carried out it does not appear justified to recommend this outline application for approval. Without full details the effect cannot be assessed entirely but is does appear inevitable that the basic relationship of the house to the space in front and the vista beyond would be prejudiced. With a wider access road the quietness of the lane may well be lost also.

These conclusions are subject to advice that may be received from Engineering Services.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Secretary of State be informed that had the Council been in a position to determine the application it would have REFUSED permission for the following reasons:

1 The access to the applicant's site is well below desirable highway standards for access and turning contrary to the intentions of Policy T.25 of the Bath Local Plan and the safety and convenience of access would not be completely improved by potential turning and widening that could be carried out.

2 The proposed development would reduce the amenity of existing residents by obstructing panoramic views from their houses and by reducing the level of privacy enjoyed at the present time in this location.

3 The proposal is contrary to the intentions of Policy C2 of the Bath Local Plan which requiries development to be sensitive to and compatible with the scale and character of the surroundings. This would occur because the development envisaged would cause damage by occupying a locally valued area of open ground and by requiring improvements to the access and turning space that would alter the scale of the access lane and remove existing boundary walls.

______________________________________________________________________

APPLICATION NO. 99/01187/FUL TYPE Full Application

EXPIRY DATE 9th Feb 2000

WARD Bathwick

Listed Building Grade II

Conservation Area

APPLICANT: Bath Spa Hotel

PROPOSAL: Installation of CCTV and security lighting

SITE LOCATION: Bath Spa Hotel Sydney Road Bath BA2 6NU

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

Bath Spa Hotel is sited at the upper level of the Hotel grounds and has a car park at the south end of the building. Car parking is also provided along the approach drive from North Road.

The main car park in the south corner of the site provides 152 car parking spaces and it is proposed to erect one six metre high pole including 2 lights and a dome camera in the approximate centre of this car park. The car park is just over 50 metres wide, east to west. On the west wall there are two lights on four metre high poles.

In the driveway in the front of, and on the north side of the Hotel, two six metre high poles including lights and video cameras are proposed; one at each end of the 39 parking spaces.

The Hotel has a driveway and garden in front of the building but the houses in Cleveland Walk have gardens on the east side of the grounds and the west and south sides of the car park are bounded by the gardens of houses in Vellore Lane and Sham Castle Lane. Two bungalows in Vellore Lane are less than 5.0 metres from the car park wall.

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS

The Avon and Somerset Constabulary have written stating that they have no comment on the siting of the positions of poles and cameras but confirm that since April 1999 there have been at least twelve reported incidents of vehicle crime at this location. They emphasise that good quality CCTV systems can be a major factor in reducing crime. If there is a likelihood of being arrested, the crime is unlikely to occur.

Representations

Five letters of concern and comment have been received from surrounding residents. There is considerable apprehension of the lights. Residents in Cleveland Walk find that they are intruded upon at present by lights from the Recreation Ground and that more lights at the end of their garden will not only add to this but take away their more distant view across the City. Comments are made that when the Hotel came to Sydney Gardens proposals then to include high lighting were rejected and the justification for this now has not been made.

With regard to details of the lights there is concern that lights will either be on all night or be triggered by movement; either will be very disturbing. There are questions on the range of the camera and whether privacy will be invaded. There are also requests to lower the height of the equipment, to move the lights on the westside of the car park away from residents and to ensure that lights do not face eastwards.

PLANNING ISSUES

The main concerns are how the lights and cameras affect the privacy and amenity of surrounding residents. It may also be necessary to reconsider the position of some poles with regard to the character and appearance of the grounds.

The Hotel is very concerned regarding security and in order to avoid too much further delay in dealing with this application the above matters raised are being investigated and will be reported with a recommendation at the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION

A further report will be made at the meeting.

______________________________________________________________________