White Young Green is an international multi-disciplinary consultant to the built, natural and social environment, with over 3000 staff located in more than 30 offices providing a comprehensive and co-ordinated range of high quality socio economic, planning, environmental, engineering, surveying and management services to a diverse range of clients in the public and private sectors.

11th April 2008

David McGaughey

Planning Officer

Chief Executives Department

Regeneration Division

Darlington Borough Council

Town Hall

Darlington

DL1 5QT

Dear Mr McGaughey,

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF TWO DETACHED DWELLINGS AT REAR OF NUMBER 63, MIDDLETON LANE, MIDDLETON ST GEORGE – APPLICATION REFERENCE 08/00216/FUL

I act on behalf of my clients known as “The Friends of Middleton Conservation Area”. My clients wish to object to the above application in the strongest possible terms and a statement of case made on their behalf is set out in this letter.

Reasons for Refusal

The following reasons for refusal are proposed:

1. The proposed dwellings would have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenities of neighbouring properties and by reason of their scale and siting would therefore be contrary to policies H11 (design and layout of new housing development) and policy H13 (backland development) of the Darlington Borough Local Plan 1997 and would be contrary to the objectives of PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990.

2. The proposed new dwellings, together with a loss of substantial garden area to the existing dwelling would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the Middleton One Row Conservation Area and the visual amenities of the area in general, contrary to policies H3 (locations for new housing development), E29 (the setting of new development), H11 (design and layout of new housing development) and H13 (backland development) of the Darlington Local Plan 1997 and would be contrary to the objectives of PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990.

3. The development will require the felling of existing trees, with an adverse impact on the character and visual appearance of the surrounding area, contrary to policies E11 (conservation of trees, woodlands and hedgerows) and E12 (trees and development) of the Darlington Borough Local Plan 1997 and would be contrary to the objectives of PPG 15: Planning and the Historic Environment and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990.

Site Description

The site is located on the western side of Middleton Lane, opposite its junction with Coatham Avenue within the Middleton One Row Conservation Area in Middleton St George. Number 63 Middleton Lane is a relatively modern two storey property built in the 1980’s in red brick with a pantile roof set back approximately 27m from the front boundary of the site. Between the house and the road is a detached double garage in front of which there are a number of mature trees adjacent to the property boundary on Middleton Lane. There is a variety of Architectural styles evident in the area, with a pair of substantial semi-detached Victoria properties to the north and more modern houses to the east, west and south.

Planning Application

The application proposes construction of two substantial five/six bedroom detached dwellings at the rear of the existing house on a garden plot which has a width of 40m and a length of 35m. The dwellings are “two and a half storeys” in height i.e two storeys with loft space and loft windows, each with integral garage and driveway parking. The total floor areas of each of these dwellings is 3406sq ft and 3388sq ft. respectively.  A Design and Access Statement accompanies the application, setting out the development context. It is noted that access to this ‘backland’ site is proposed to be shared with the existing dwelling at number 63 from Middleton Lane. The access road then runs between the exiting dwelling and the boundary of number 64 Middleton Lane to the proposed development land in the rear garden to the north. As well as a Design and Access Statement, a Tree Report and Transport Statement have been submitted with the application to address these specific issues.

Planning Context

No 65 Middleton Lane - At the time of writing, an application has just been refused at the rear of a substantial Victoria semi-detached property at number 65 Middleton Lane, (Ref: 08/00125/FUL), for a new dwelling and detached garage in the rear garden. My clients have opposed this application on a number of grounds but are particularly pleased that the Council has recognised, inter alia, in its grounds for refusal, the potential effect that it would have had upon the erosion of the character of the Conservation Area.

No 64 Middleton Lane - An application on the ‘other half’ of the above pair of semi-detached properties, at number 64 Middleton Lane, (Ref: 07/00225/FUL) was approved conditionally on 27^th June 2007 following a Members site visit. This application, for “conversion of existing dwelling to 4No. Apartments and erection of 3No. Town Houses in three storey form, car parking and ancillary works (as amended by plans received 16^th May 2007)” was subject to a Section 106 Agreement to secure the provision of two affordable residential units. The application has not been implemented and there is a requirement for this to happen, by condition and in accordance with the Agreement, within three years of the Decision Notice, otherwise a further application would have to be submitted to renew the permission, or else to apply for alternative proposals.

In addition, it must be pointed out that the planning history at number 64 indicates that a previous application (Ref: 07/00225/FUL) was refused for the conversion of that property to form four apartments and the erection of a three storey building within the rear garden to provide four bedroomed dwelling units.  This was refused for following reasons:-

4. The proposed new build would have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties by reason of its size and siting and would therefore be contrary to policies H11 (design and layout of new housing development) and H13 (backland development) of the Darlington Borough Local Plan 1997.

5. By reason of its size and siting, the proposed new dwelling, together with a loss of substantial garden area to the existing dwelling would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the Middleton One Row Conservation Area and the visual amenities of the area in general contrary to policies E29 (the setting of new development), E35 (Conservation Areas), H11 (design and layout of new housing development) and H13 (backland development) of the Darlington Local Plan 1997.

6. The development is likely to have a detrimental impact upon mature trees adjacent to the existing vehicular entrance to the site including trees which are protected by the County Borough of Darlington Tree Preservations Order (Number 7) 1980. The loss of these trees would have an adverse impact on the character and visual appearance of the surrounding area which would be contrary to policies E11 (conservation of trees, woodlands and hedgerows), E12 (trees and development) and E35 (conservation areas) of the Darlington Borough Local Plan 1997.

7. The proposed access does not provide for satisfactory visibility splay with the adjoining highway which is likely to result in conditions prejudicial to highway safety, contrary to policies T13 (new development standards) and T24 (parking and servicing requirements for new development) of the Darlington Local Plan 1997.

Although a further application at number 64 Middleton Lane was subsequently approved (Ref: 07/00225/FUL) reasons 1-3 of the reasons for refusal of the above application still have relevance to the forthcoming decision on the current application at number 65 Middleton Lane.

No 63 Middleton Lane - It is interesting to note that in the Design and Access Statement submitted with the current application, makes reference to approved development at number 64 Middleton Lane, stating “it may be argued that the approval of this application sets a precedent for the development proposed at number 63 Middleton Lane”. However, with recent refusal of the application at number 65, this now seems highly unlikely. 

Planning Policy Analysis

The extant planning policy document which must be referred to in the context of the current application is the Darlington Local Plan. It was approved in November 1997, to incorporate adopted alterations at September 2001 and then reviewed in July 2002. In the absence of a Local Development Framework, which is still under preparation, the Local Plan still provides policies against which this application must be determined. However, it is noted that some policies have now expired as they have been superceded by National Planning Policy Guidance. The following policies relevant to the application at number 65 Middleton Lane nevertheless still apply within the Borough of Darlington Local Plan:-

Policy E2 – Development Limits

The site lies within the development limits for Middleton St George

Policy E11 – Conservation of Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows and Policy E12 – Trees and Development

These policies point to the conservation of trees and hedges wherever possible, as a result of their value in the landscape. It is noted that there are a number of semi-mature trees that would have to be removed within the Conservation Area, to accommodate the proposed development. The application and associated tree report make light of the value of these trees in spite of policy E12 which states, inter alia, that “the layout and design of the development should, wherever possible, avoid the need to remove trees and hedgerows and provide for their successful retention and protection during development”. It continues “where removal is unavoidable, any required landscape work should be so designed as to compensate, on or off the development site, for the loss of amenity of the area”. This policy not only reflects the importance of trees, woodlands and hedgerows in Conservation Areas, but in the event that removals of existing trees were permitted, there do not appear to be any mitigating measures stipulated in the application in order to comply with the requirements of policy E12.

Policy E14 – Landscaping of Development

This policy paves the way for appropriate hard and soft landscaping in respect of the setting of new development which is addressed in the applicant’s Design and Access Statement.

Policy E29 – The Setting of New Development

This policy refers to the need for development to respect the intrinsic character of its townscape setting and crucially states that  “new development……..will be required to respect the intrinsic character of its townscape setting in terms of its siting……and the protection of the existing townscape features, including gardens and other open spaces which contribute to the character of the setting and not to materially detract from the appearance of its surroundings”. Despite arguments made in the applicant’s Design and Access Statement, it is quite clear that progressive incursions into existing Townscape features, such as gardens, if allowed, would progressively erode the character of the Conservation Area.

Policy E35 – Conservation Areas

This policy has been superceded by National Guidance.

Policy H3 – Locations for New housing Development

This is a general policy stating that new development will normally be approved within the Urban Area and development limits of rural settlements “provided the site is not specifically proposed or safeguarded for another use and that the development accords with other plan policies”. The fact that the development proposed is within a Conservation Area means that development will certainly not “preserve or enhance” its character.

Policy H11 – Design and Layout of New Housing Developments

These issues are addressed within the applicant’s Design and Access Statement.  However, the proposed dwellings are inappropriate within a Conservation, since they clearly do not meet the test ‘to preserve or enhance’ the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, since they are not in keeping, do not respect its predominant character and density, since it would intensify residential density, thereby having an adverse effect upon residential amenity.

Policy H13 – Backland Development

The text which supports this policy states “that backland development of the type proposed is not normally acceptable where it involves the loss of significant trees or the loss of an open area which contributes to the general amenity of the area”.  With reference to this application, although the trees which would have to be felled are not mature, they and the existing garden space make an important contribution to the character and general amenity of the Conservation Area.

Policy T13 – New Development Standards and Policy T24 – Parking and Servicing Requirements for New Development

This policy sets out the standards of a new development. It is apparent that backland, tandem development served by shared access does not best meet the high standards sought after by the Council. There is, instead, a shared drive proposed for users of the existing dwelling and the dwellings applied for to the rear for use by vehicles and pedestrians.

Policy T31 – New Development and Public Transport

This policy makes reference to the location of new developments in relation to accessibility to public transport, dealt with in the applicant’s Design and Access Statement.

In addition to saved policies in the Darlington Local Plan, planning policy guidance applies to issues of concern to my client as follows:-

Planning Policy Statement 1: Planning and Sustainability

The nature of the development proposed appears to be a traditional form of brick and block construction. PPS 1 sets out the Government’s objections for sustainable development, which in terms of construction have been more recently reflected in emerging sustainable construction guidance, set out in ‘The Code for Sustainable Homes’.  In this respect, the development falls short of the aims of PPS1 and Government construction guidance.  Furthermore, I am advised by my client that the existing infrastructure of the village is ‘overcapacity’, with severe pressure on school provision and sewerage.  School places are oversubscribed and sewage is tankered out daily by Northumbrian Water, due to the limited capacity of the system.

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing

This planning policy statement sets out the National Planning Policy Framework for the delivery of the Government’s housing objectives, within advice on matters such as density and layout. PPS3 makes the case for higher density development above 30 dwellings per hectare, which are not complied with in this application and which would, in any event, be clearly inappropriate in this situation. It is apparent that the application site falls within the definition of “previously developed land” however, it also states that considerations of design and layout must be informed by the wider context, not just the neighbouring buildings, but also the townscape and landscape of the wider locality. With this in mind, it is apparent that the wider context is of relevance in the case of this application, since it is within a Conservation Area, where the need to preserve and protect the character of the area outweigh the need to promote new development as referred to in PPS3. 

Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment and the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

The above guidance and statutory provisions are relevant to the development within Conservation Areas and supercede policy 35 of the Darlington Local Plan. Section 69 of the Act imposes a duty upon Local Planning Authorities to designate Conservation Areas as ‘areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character of which is desirable to ‘preserve or enhance’.  Section 72 of the same Act requires local planning authorities to pay special attention to the impact of the new development on the character and appearance of Conservation Areas. It is considered that the cumulative effect of unacceptable backland development specified in policy H13 of the Local Plan would erode the character and purpose of the statutory designation.

Middleton St George and Lower Dinsdale Parish Councils Joint Parish Plan

Issued Report December 2002

This document was prepared by the local community of Middleton St George and Middleton One Row in association with a firm of Chartered Town Planners. Although it is not a statutory planning document, it nevertheless sets out the aspirations of both Parish Councils for the future of the communities in which they live to include reference to the development and other use of land. Parish Plans are part of the “Vital Villages” scheme promoted by the Countryside Agency (now Natural England) in accordance with Countryside Agency guidance.

The document comprises an ‘issues report’, setting out issues of concern to the local community and an ‘action plan’ setting out the actions which the Parish could undertake and establishing the responsibilities of other bodies which can be influenced by the Plan. Preparation of the issued report has involved all sections of the community including a questionnaire survey. The questionnaire revealed (paragraph 26) that a large proportion of residents commented that the village has had too much new housing development and that there was pressure on facilities , especially the primary school and surgery. Paragraph 5.6 makes reference to  the fact that Middleton One Row Conservation Area stands out as having high environmental quality which the residents wish to preserve in general terms. Para 8.10 includes comments made about new housing in the Parishes in context of its effect upon the capacity of local services. There is a feeling that there are too many new houses in the village already and a specific quote which states “we must be at saturation point regarding new housing”.

Conclusion

It is concluded that there are several key area of policy within the Council’s Local Plan and in National Guidance, which when considered in the context of recent planning decisions in the locality, inevitably lead to the conclusion that development of the nature proposed, if allowed, would most certainly contribute towards an erosion of the character of the Middleton One Row Conservation Area and would therefore be detrimental to residential amenity.  In no way can such development satisfy the test in PPG 15: Planning and the Historic Environment, since it does not have a positive, or even a “neutral” effect. Instead the development applied for would have adverse effect upon the residential amenity of the Conservation Area, leading towards the degradation of its character.  With the Council’s recent decision to refuse development of a similar nature at number 65 Middleton Lane, it is reassuring that the Council now appreciates this situation. My clients would therefore urge the Council to continue to take a stand on this issue and refuse the application on the sound planning grounds outlined in this letter.

Yours sincerely

Glenn McGill

Associate Director