PA13/08062 | Conversion and extension to detached garage to create a self-contained dwelling with on-site parking | 14 Steamers
Submitted by Angarrack.info ... on Sun, 06/10/2013 - 07:53.
Via http://planning.cornwall.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.d...
| Reference: | PA13/08062 |
|---|---|
| Alternative Reference: | PP-02868157 |
| Application Received: | 04 Sep 2013 |
| Address: | 14 Steamers Hill Angarrack Hayle TR27 5JB |
| Proposal: | Conversion and extension to detached garage to create a self-contained dwelling with on-site parking |
| Status: | Pending Consideration |
| Application Validated Date: | 23 Sep 2013 |
|---|---|
| Actual Committee Date: |
| Latest Neighbour Consultation Date: | 26 Sep 2013 |
|---|---|
| Neighbour Consultation Expiry Date: | 17 Oct 2013 |
| Standard Consultation Date: | 11 Oct 2013 |
| Standard Consultation Expiry Date: | 01 Nov 2013 |
| Last Advertised In Press Date: | 03 Oct 2013 |
| Latest Advertisement Expiry Date: | 24 Oct 2013 |
| Last Site Notice Posted Date: | 01 Oct 2013 |
| Latest Site Notice Expiry Date: | 22 Oct 2013 |
| Decision Issued Date: | |
|---|---|
| Determination Deadline: | 18 Nov 2013 |
Conversion and extension to detached garage to create a self-contained dwelling with on-site parking - 14 Steamers Hill Angarrack Hayle TR27 5JB
Ref. No: PA13/08062 | Received date: Wed 04 Sep 2013 | Status: Pending Consideration | Case Type: Application
Contributions
- Angarrack Defibrillator Team (25)
- Angarrack Inn (336)
- Angarrack Methodist Chapel (3)
- Carol (15)
- Gail (1)
- GordonG (12)
- Hayle Development Group on Facebook (5)
- Hayle Harbour Authority (4)
- Hayle Town Council (5)
- louise (1)
- Lynne (94)
- Mal (1)
- MattBuckley66 (9)
- Neil (22)
- Neils Garden Care (9)
- Russell (21)
- Secretary - Christmas Lights (122)
- Steve (3)
- webmaster (5047)
Book page
Similar
- Approved unconditional | Non Material Amendment to PA11/10691(Construction of two dwellings) to include changing softwood painte
- PA15/02669 | Certificate of lawfulness for existing use: Use of land for the stationing of a static caravan used for residential
- 150219 | PA15/01434 Submission of details to discharge 4 attached to decision notice PA11/10691 - Plot To The North Of 13 And 15
- APPEAL | PA14/02720 Conversion & extension to detached garage building to create a self-contained dwelling with on-site
- 141024 | PA14/03661/PREAPP Construction of single storey/dorma style 3/4 bed dwelling in grounds of our house. Grounds sit 3m lo
Similar across site
- Approved unconditional | Non Material Amendment to PA11/10691(Construction of two dwellings) to include changing softwood painte
- PA15/02669 | Certificate of lawfulness for existing use: Use of land for the stationing of a static caravan used for residential
- 150219 | PA15/01434 Submission of details to discharge 4 attached to decision notice PA11/10691 - Plot To The North Of 13 And 15
- APPEAL | PA14/02720 Conversion & extension to detached garage building to create a self-contained dwelling with on-site
- 141024 | PA14/03661/PREAPP Construction of single storey/dorma style 3/4 bed dwelling in grounds of our house. Grounds sit 3m lo
17 Oct 2013 Council shares concerns of planning officer. The Cou
Council shares concerns of planning officer. The Council asks for this application to be called in if officer minded to approve it. Submitted online 18/10/13
Via http://www.hayletowncouncil.net/documents/17October2013AppA.pdf
App. No Date Applicant Application Date for CC Officer and Comments HTC Decision To go to CC Report received details and comments and Date sent CC Decision CC Location to CC Cmte and date Decision Rec’d to HTC PA13/08062 30/9/13 Mrs E Amos Conversion and 17/10/13 – Martin Jose HTC objects on extension to detached extension The building is located to the rear of the following garage to create a req’d the existing dwelling with access grounds: there self-contained 1/10/13 and onto steamers hill. I am awaiting the would be dwelling with on-site approved Highways Officers comments as I serious issues parking have some concern with the access. I regarding the also have some concern with the size overlooking of 14 Steamers Hill, and positioning of the building in this neighbouring Angarrack, Hayle location which will remove the properties; this TR27 5JB parking area for 14 steamers hill and is a very small create a large building which will plot and the appear prominent in this location. proposed building is too large and would constitute overdevelopmen t of the site; there is very poor access; the App. No Date Applicant Application Date for CC Officer and Comments HTC Decision To go to CC Report received details and comments and Date sent CC Decision CC Location to CC Cmte and date Decision Rec’d to HTC Council shares the concerns of the planning officer. The Council asks for this application to be called in if the officer is minded to approve it. Submitted online 18/10/13Public Comments on PA13/06605 as of 18 October
Collapse AllExpand All
Ms S Deacon (Objects)
Comment submitted Wed 16 Oct 2013
Morning I am writing to object against the planning of a dwelling on 14 Steamers Hill , reference number PA13/08062. My Name is Sarah Deacon, Address - Sycamores, Steamers Hill, Angarrack The reasons I am objecting to the above dwelling is: 1. The access onto Steamers Hill I feel would be dangerous as the property would be located on the corner. 2. Back lane is a very small lane and cannot I feel maintain an increased level of transport. 3. If new access was built for the dwelling then this would open up onto Steamers Hill which is already very busy and will increase in traffic when the new development is built down at Marks and Spencers. I hope these reason are taken into account. My parents who live next door but are away on holiday have asked me to also tell you that they would object to the planning. There details are Name - Mr Uren Address - Polkerris, Steamers Hill, Angarrack. Kind Regards Mrs S Deacon
- Jason Hurr (Objects)
Comment submitted Tue 15 Oct 2013
The 2010 planning consent (10-0308) was to convert the existing garage (which itself replaced a small garage on the same site) to annex accommodation for a family member of the owner of 14 Steamers Hill. The planning officer?s report stated ?the development shall not be occupied at any time other than for the purpose ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling now known as 14 Steamers Hill?. These conditions were ?to ensure that the development is not used unlawfully as a separate unit of accommodation?. The reason the planning officer gave for approval included that it would preserve the setting of nearby listed buildings and there would be no adverse neighbour impacts as the only windows and door overlooked and opened onto the shared garden. The officer also noted that there was existing parking sufficient for 3 cars at the time. The annex proposal in 2010 was found to be acceptable as the shared garden and parking facilities ensured a good level of reliance upon the main building; the converted annex would only be visible from the junction of Steamers Hill and Back Lane; and the new windows would not overlook neighbouring properties. None of these are true of the current proposals. I have the following concerns about the new proposals. Parking and access: The parking spaces off Back Lane will be removed and the plans indicate a sloping drive for 2 cars opening directly onto Steamers Hill for the new property. This would leave no off-road parking provision for the occupants and visitors to 14 Steamers Hill. Steamers Hill is already very busy and often congested from the Back Lane junction to the crossroads, even though yellow lines have recently been painted in an attempt to alleviate the dangers to pedestrians and drivers. The addition of a 3 bedroom dwelling, combined with the reduction of a parking space and the need for a driveway with sufficiently wide sightlines opening onto Steamers Hill, will make the parking problems considerably worse. Due to the awkward junction, many vehicles leaving Back Lane have used the right hand side of the road for years, and the existing pull-in by the garage is frequently used as a passing place; without it, substantial alterations to the junction will be necessary to avoid the need for oncoming cars to reverse onto Steamers Hill. There is often flooding down Steamers Hill in heavy rainfall due to frequently blocked drains; another driveway opening onto it is unlikely to help. Size of the proposed building: Its area and height are significantly greater than the existing garage and risk overshadowing nearby properties. The siting of the large upstairs windows is likely to intrude on the privacy of the neighbouring properties, particularly to the north.
Mr John Relf (Objects)
Comment submitted Tue 15 Oct 2013
I wish to object to this application on the grounds that it breaches the original application for an annexe only on this site, since it was stated that this is "a site where dwellings would not normally be permitted". Access to and from Back Lane is already poor and the proposed additional access would add to the danger already there. Steamer's Hill/Hatches Hill/Grist Lane are already frequently used as an alternative route to and from Hayle and the West Cornwall Retail Park making it an extremely busy route for much of the year. Parking is already a problem in Angarrack, double yellow lines have recently been placed around the entrance to Back Lane, and this proposal would remove off street parking for 14 Steamer's Hill thus exacerbating the situation.
Mrs Marylyn Kennard (Objects)
Comment submitted Tue 15 Oct 2013
I wish to object to this application on the grounds that it breaches the original application for an annexe only, since it was stated that this is "a site where dwellings would not normally be permitted" as it is not suitable for a separate dwelling. Back Lane access is poor and any additional access so close would add to the danger already there. Steamer's Hill/Hatches Hill is frequently used as a local by-pass to Loggans roundabout (there is no other way to avoid it) by trucks, vans, cars etc. making it an extremely busy route for much of the year. Parking is already a problem in Angarrack (indeed double yellow lines have recently been placed around the entrance to Back Lane) and this would leave no off street parking for 14 Steamer's Hill and very little for the new dwelling. It would be overdevelopment of the site and no approval should be considered without physically viewing the area (not just looking at a flat plan!) It would also overlook at least 3 other properties.
Mr Russell Clarke (Objects)
Comment submitted Fri 04 Oct 2013
This application replaces a previous application for an Annexe development on this site: (PA13/03464 | W1/10-0308-HP). This previous application was granted conditional planning part of which clearly states that this is "a site where dwellings would not normally be permitted". Hence the need for the permitted development to be an annexe. Obviously then, as nothing has changed, this proposed self contained dwelling can not be permitted here. The judgement that "dwellings would not normally be permitted" is made because of important noise, residential amenity and highways reasons: For example the surrounding area is low density residential which would change to high density with this proposed self-contained dwelling; the eruption of such a modern building adjacent to the listed buildings on Steamers Hill will drastically compromise the setting of these listed buildings (numbers 14, 12 and 13-15 together). The new design contrasts badly with the neighbouring listed property and indeed to the neighbouring properties in general. This new self-contained (and not annexed) development proposal is on a larger footprint than the prevously permitted annexed development - both horizontally and vertically; it does not share garden space; it does not share parking space - in fact the proposed development does away with all off road parking for number 14 thus ensuring that in future parking for number 14 would be wholly on Steamers Hill increasing the hazard to pedestrians, cyclists and horseriders as well as increasing congestion. Highways, Traffic and the Council have already declared the parts of Steamers Hill and Back Lane that border this proposed development dangerous and have required yellow lines to be painted and parking controls to be created there. For us at number 16 the increase in roof height and design of the windows to the north would overlook our home, garden and bedroom. This proposed dwelling is only metres from our bedroom. The provision of opening windows just increases this overlooking and creates extra noise nuisance. The use of the outdoor space as new amenity space will increase noise and disturbance to neighbouring properties spoiling their quiet enjoyment of their residential amenity. The removal of trees would significantly reduce the existing screening of the site significantly changing the view and nature of the site. The increase in roof height and expansion of the footprint of the garage will compromise the surrounding properties. The increase in roof height and the prevailing south to westerly winds mean use of wood fired boilers. BBQs etc is likely to cause significant smell and smoke inconvenience to neighbouring properties. The increase in roof height and design of the roof - together with the removal of the trees are also likely to increase the problems with Seagull nuisance. Finally, no attempt at consultation has been made and indeed to date no notice of this application has been posted to neighbours or placed on surrounding street furniture. The street light at the end of Back Lane still currently shows the application to extend the PA13/03464 | W1/10-0308-HP annexe permission!
- C Clarke (Objects)
Comment submitted Fri 04 Oct 2013
The conditional planning granted to the Annexe development (PA13/03464 | W1/10-0308-HP) states this is "a site where dwellings would not normally be permitted" so presumably a dwelling will not be permitted here. In addition: The surrounding area is low density residential, another full sized house with another driveway accessing Steamers Hill would materially increase the density of the housing. The development of such a modern building adjacent to the view of the listed building will compromise the setting of the listed building and the historic nature of the views both up and down Steamers Hill and in particular the view of the three listed buildings - 14, 12 and 13-15 together. No attempt at consultation has been made. The new design is wholly unsympathetic to the neighbouring listed property and indeed to the neighbouring properties in general. The increase in roof height and design of the windows to the north would overlook our home, garden and bedroom. The provision of opening windows facing into Back Lane will increase noise nuisance to neighbouring properties - particular given the direction of the prevailing winds. The proposed windows will be only feet from our bedroom. The use of the outdoor space as new amenity space will increase noise and disturbance to neighbouring properties spoiling their quiet enjoyment of their residential amenity. This new development proposal is on a larger footprint than the currently permitted development both horizontally and vertically; does not share garden space; does not share parking space - indeed means that the parking for number 14 will in future be wholly on Steamers Hill at all times increasing the hazard to pedestrians, cyclists and horseriders as well as increasing congestion. The driveway would cause additional hazard on a junction already deemed sufficiently dangerous by Highways and Council to have required yellow lines to be painted and parking controls to be created. Cars emerging from the driveway will be invisible to traffic turning left from Back Lane down Steamers Hill until too late. The route along Back Lane and down Steamers Hill is a popular circular route for local families with children on bicycles, scooters, skateboards and horses etc as well as dog walkers. The driveway will present a completely new hazard as currently traffic only emerges onto the left hand side (going downhill) of Steamers Hill from the pub carpark entrance. The driveway will cause more water to run down Steamers Hill increasing both the flooding risk to downhill properties and the already severe danger to pedestrians from adding more slippery materials to an already dangerously slippy surface - at least three falls have previously occurred on the stretch of Steamers Hill where the new driveway is proposed to emerge. There is a bat colony which regularly hunts the insects drawn to the street light under the trees - this hunting ground will be removed disturbing the bats. The removal of trees will significantly reduce the existing screening of the garage again changing the view and nature of the site. The increase in roof height and expansion of the footprint of the garage will compromise the surrounding properties. The increase in roof height and the prevailing south to westerly winds mean use of wood fired boilers. BBQs etc is likely to cause significant smell and smoke inconvenience to neighbouring properties. The increase in roof height and design of the roof - together with the removal of the trees are also likely to increase the problems with Seagull nuisance.
Consultee Comments (3) as of 20 Nov
Highway Development Management - West
Comment Date: Fri 01 Nov 2013
I am unable to establish if 14 Steamers Hill will have parking if this application were to be consented. I recommend that parking is provided for the existing dwelling. Please re-consult with amended plans.
Environmental Health Planning Liaison
Comment Date: Fri 27 Sep 2013
Miles Randall: Thank you for consulting Public Health and Protection: The submitted Sensitive Development Questionnaire is acceptable. However the Enviroscreen certificate is not acceptable for the purpose of the non interpretive report. The required minimum information in a report is outlined in Appendix B of the Cornwall Council Guide to considering contaminated land in the planning process. Therefore, I will have to recommend refusal of this application until such time as the required information is submitted.
Hayle Town Council
Comment Date: Fri 18 Oct 2013
Hayle Town Council objects to this planning application on the following grounds: there would be serious issues regarding the overlooking of neighbouring properties; this is a very small plot and the proposed building is too large and would constitute overdevelopment of the site; there is very poor access; the Council shares the concerns of the planning officer. The Council asks for this application to be called in if the officer is minded to approve it.