08/01064/FUL CHANGE OF USE FROM PADDOCK TO RESIDENTIAL GARDEN LAND AT Yew Tree Cottage, Timpson Lane, Clifton Reynes FOR Iain Morrison INTRODUCTION Yew Tree Cottage is a detached dwelling at the northern extent of Clifton Reynes. The site forms part of the village conservation area. The area of land subject of this application is located west of the established residential curtilage and outside the conservation area measuring approximately 32 metres by 16 metres. The land has been enclosed with a post and rail fence and laid to grass. The remaining field is untended and at the time of the site visit there were horses grazing on it. A Members Site Inspection is to be held at the request of Councillor Peter Geary and a verbal report concerning this will be provided at the meeting. CURRENT APPLICATION Retrospective planning permission is sought to change the use of the land to incorporate it into the private garden of Yew Tree Cottage. The land has been linked by removing the existing rear boundary fence and planting, creating an open link to the extended area. MAIN ISSUES 1. The principle of development. 2. The impact on the character and appearance of the area. 3. The impact on neighbouring amenity. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 01/01134/FUL - Planning permission was granted to change the use of agricultural land to private garden at Tulleymore, Church Lane. 01/01135/FUL - Planning permission was granted to change the use of agricultural land to private garden at East barn, Church Lane. 99/01044/MK - Planning permission was granted to change the use of agricultural land to private gardens at a number of dwellings on Spring Lane, namely, The Walnuts, Walnut Cottage, Moor End Cottage and Numbers 1 & 3 Spring Lane. (131)
(132)
RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY The most relevant policies in the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011 are: D1 - Impact of development proposals on locality. S10 - Open Countryside. S11 - Areas of Attractive Landscape. HE6 - Conservation Areas CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS 3 third party letters of objection have been received raising the following issues: - Would violate the principle of the village envelope. - Set a precedent for others. - Existing use of the land is agricultural and not paddock. - Land is not essential for domestic use of the dwelling. - Existing consents do not set a precedent, as they are materially different in their impact on neighbours. - Loss of privacy to The Hive. - Noise and fumes from mowing affecting amenity of The Hive. Clifton Reynes and Newton Blossomville Joint Parish Council oppose the application stating: 'The land is outside the village envelope, inside the conservation area and contrary to the Local Plan. The fact that other paddocks have had a change of use is not a precedent nor a right. All of the properties referred to overlook open fields and remained paddocks for at least 10 years if not more before change of use was approved. 'The Parish Council is particularly concerned by the loss of privacy to The Hive caused by the part removal of the original boundary hedge and suggest that this should be reinstated at its former height and thickness in order to at least maintain the previous level of privacy. 'The Parish Council fully endorses the condition of sale that prevents any structure being erected on the paddock in the future and would like to see future mowing of the area in keeping with paddock land and not lawn.' A Council Landscape Officer has commented that the fencing is in keeping with the location and the use acceptable based on the existing garden and other enclosed pieces of paddock nearby. It is suggested that the area is kept open so that it would not take on the appearance of an 'urban edge' which would be out of character. CONSIDERATIONS Principle of development The application property is located within the open countryside where Local Plan Policy S10 applies. Policy S10 would normally indicate a need to resist the visually prominent extension of a garden into the open countryside because it would not be development essential for agriculture, forestry or (133)
countryside recreation. Policy S11 states, among other things, that development proposals within areas of attractive landscape should not damage its character and should enhance landscape features where possible. Policy HE6 states that proposals affecting the setting of Conservation Areas should either preserve or enhance the character and appearance of that area. For clarification the Conservation Area includes the existing rear garden of Yew Tree Cottage but not this additional land. Policy D1 addresses, among other things, impacts on neighbouring residential amenity. Although the extension of gardens into the open countryside is normally resisted, it is considered that a modest extension of a garden area may, in certain circumstances, be deemed not to harm the character and appearance of the countryside. There have been several other instances where the Council has permitted changes of use from agricultural land to residential garden land in the village. Regardless of this the proposal shall be assessed on its individual merits. The impact on the character of the area The enclosing and mowing of the land has altered its character and it no longer reflects the unkempt nature of the land around it. It would take the curtilage of the dwelling beyond the recognised boundary of the village but it is not the first dwelling in the village to do so. The extensions of gardens at Tullymore and East Barn reflect the character of this proposal. The fence line would not sit beyond the rear boundary of the adjacent property, The Hive, and therefore does not sit as an incongruous and isolated land parcel. The site is adjacent to the Conservation Area but would not be visible from the public realm. It is a simple proposal and would not have any impact on the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, or its designation as an Area of Attractive Landscape. It is therefore considered that the enlargement of the garden as proposed would not harm the character of the area in this instance and that the proposal would not be contrary to Local Plan policies S10, S11 or HE6. The impact of the fence could be softened by requiring planting to be carried out on the borders. This has been requested on similar schemes that have been approved and would be appropriate in this instance also. It is not considered that this would set an unacceptable precedent for other development. It may prompt a future application from the adjacent dwelling north of the application site which would be considered on its own merits. The impact on neighbouring amenity at The Hive Previous applications indicate that these windows serve a lobby area and utility room but they do serve the kitchen and seating area within that. It would be possible to see into these windows if someone purposely set out to do so. Likewise the proposed garden area is directly overlooked by the neighbouring dwelling. It is considered though that the neighbouring privacy would only be affected if users of the land were to purposely make a point of looking through the windows, requiring them to be in close proximity to them. It is assumed that the applicants would not use the garden for this purpose and therefore (134)
this scenario would not occur. It is considered therefore that the possibility of these rooms being overlooked from this area of land would not result in a detrimental loss of privacy that would warrant a reason for refusal. The issue of noise and fumes would only be a temporary one while the grass is being mowed and cannot be said to detrimentally affect neighbouring amenity and not contrary to Local Plan policy D1. The Parish Council request that the original boundary and planting be reinstated but this cannot be requested as its removal would not require planning permission. It is considered that the inclusion of a condition removing the right to erect outbuildings on the land is a justified request and it would reflect the Landscape Officer's comments. It would however not be possible to keep the area in the character of a paddock. The proposal is to include the land as part of the garden for the dwelling and would be kept as such. RECOMMENDATION It is concluded that the overall pattern of development in Timpson Lane would not be significantly changed by increasing the depth of the plot, and due to the minimal impact in this instance on the rural landscape, visual intrusion would not result from the proposal. Furthermore the impact on neighbouring amenity is not considered to be significant to warrant a justified reason for refusal. The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions removing Class E development rights (outbuildings) and requiring appropriate planting on the boundaries of the land. Report author / case officer Alex Harrison Contact details - 01908 252608 alex.harrison@milton-keynes.gov.uk (135)