Planning Committee 24/05/2016 landscaping and parking...

Planning Committee24/05/2016

P/2015/0902/FUL

APPLICATION NUMBER: P/2015/0902/FUL

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing residential building with garage and erection of 3 storey building comprising of 8no apartments with associated landscaping and parking.

LOCATION: 92 St James Road, RainhillSt Helens

WARD: Rainhill Ward

APPLICANT: Mr Paul Hurst

CASE OFFICER: Ms Angela Forsyth

RECOMMENDATION: Grant Planning Permission Subject to Conditions

1. APPLICATION SITE 1.1 Rock House is a large detached dwelling located in an established residential area.

The site falls within both Rainhill Conservation Area 2 and Rainhill Residential Character Area. The building is a white stucco rendered double fronted villa with raised quoin detailing on the corners and cills / headers to windows and with ornate chimney detailing. A mid point horizontal feature rail breaks up the building and two single storey front window bays define the porch entrance. The dwelling has a poor flat roof two storey extension on one side, has been vacant for many years and is in a very poor state of repair.

1.2 Rock House (the defined application site) is currently one of three buildings on a larger open site; consisting of Rockland, Rock House and a single storey chalet block (containing 7 / 8No. units) (Rockland is now used as B1 offices but was formerly a hotel). The site as a whole is effectively double fronted with Rockland fronting View Road whereas Rock House fronts St James Road. Vehicles enter the site from View Road, moving through a one way system and exiting onto St James Road. Off street parking is available within the site with some demarcation of parking bays and some areas of less formal parking.

1.3 The local character is one of large bespoke detached dwellings on large green and leafy landscaped plots, with solid well defined front boundaries consisting of sandstone or brick walls.

1.4 Rock House sits prominently on St James Road and is defined by a sandstone wall with a maintained hedgerow visible behind / above; which also incorporates a shaped hedgerow archway feature above the pedestrian entrance gate. The front wall and hedgerow is over 30m in length and as such, this site is of very significant value in the context of the character of the conservation area.

1.5 As part of this application, the applicant has edged the proposed residential curtilage to be associated for Rock House in red; with the remaining site edged blue.


P/2015/0902/FUL

2. PROPOSAL

2.1 The application is for the demolition of Rock House and the erection of a 2½ storey building containing 8No. 2 bed residential units. 13 off street parking spaces are proposed, access for 10 of the spaces would be taken from View Road (via the one way system) and the remaining 3 would have direct access from St James Road.

3. CONSULTATIONS 3.1 Highways: No objection in principle, new layout meets the Councils 150% parking

standard for apartments. However concerns remain over the access arrangements, with the main parking area only being accessible via View Road and the well-established traffic system through the site.

Whilst some of the servicing of such premises may be expected to take place on street, as a consequence of the unusual access restrictions it is considered likely that some visitor parking will also take place within St James’ Road. However, very little on street parking currently occurs along this section of St James Road.

On balance, whilst the proposal is supported in highway terms, given the increased provision and suggested allocation arrangement, highway objection is not considered sustainable.

3.2 Conservation Officer: No objection in principle, proposal has been substantially altered to address earlier concerns. The front elevation the area of window relative to wall has been increased and altering the shape and size of the upper floor windows means they do not over dominate the composition. Some detailing is indicated for the ridge to help break up the large expanse of roof. Although the proposed building would be very substantial, the design breaks up its considerable bulk by using projecting and receding bays capped with strong barge boards, and by introducing detailing such as contrasting masonry courses and architraves.

The original proposal showed the front garden to have been largely removed and replaced with a driveway and parking. Parking also dominated the east side of the former garden area, and because a long section of sandstone wall was to have been removed, the large expanse of parking would have been visible from the public footpath. The verdant character of the conservation area would have been harmed. The plans have now been altered to redistribute parking and reduce the area of parking to the east side. This has enabled the retention of more walling. Parking has been entirely removed from the front garden area and the original lawn area will be retained. Additional parking space is available on street.

There is a note on the plan that the front walls might need to be demolished and reinstated at a later date to allow for construction vehicles. This aspect of the development work should be subject to a condition requiring the landscape and walls to be reinstated to the satisfaction of the authority prior to the occupation of any of the units.

It will be important to ensure high quality materials and a condition is recommended seeking samples of all visible materials. The windows are indicated as upvc but these are not considered an appropriate material in the conservation area. Such a large building has the capability to alter the character of the area if not carefully detailed. The proposed building replaces one which has painted timber windows and it would not preserve or enhance the local character if it did not also have painted timber windows.


P/2015/0902/FUL

Details of the other materials including bricks, stone architraves, natural slates, ridge tiles, barge boards, dormer cladding and finials should also be submitted for prior approval. The slates should be a dark grey/blue colour. Judgement on the proposed plastic based products should be reserved until the Council has the opportunity to have sight of them.

3.3 Tree Officer: No objection in principle subject to the planting of 4no. trees and a landscaping condition.

3.4 Environmental Health Contamination: No objection subject to condition re landfill gas.

3.5 Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service: No objection in principle, the building has been assessed as having “low” potential for bat roosts and concludes no further surveys are required. This was further queried and the building has features that may be used by bats in the future. Therefore, an updated bat roost inspection should be undertaken if works do not commence on site by August 2016. In addition a Method Statement should be submitted that includes the use of Reasonable Avoidance Measures to avoid harm to bats.

3.6 Rainhill Parish Council: The Parish fully endorse the Conservation Officer’s report and subject to all the recommendations made being implemented, would not wish to make further comment.

3.7 Fire Service: No objection subject to standard advice

4. REPRESENTATIONS 4.1 The application was advertised by way of 10 individual neighbour letters, a site notice

and a press notice. 11 individual letters of objection have been received as a result of this publicity. The objections focus on:

The demolition of the house with significant history is unnecessary and will detract from the Conservation Area.

Historic house of character being demolished, character is one of inherent maturity and needs to be retained, significant mature trees on the property and sandstone walls need to be retained

The house is very run down but further attempts should be made to reinstate it to its former glory, sandstone walls trees and extensive hedging add greatly to the area.

The plan represents an overdevelopment of the site, the enlarged footprint and additional parking destroys the verdant nature of this part of Rainhill.

The treed nature of the area has not been protected and trees of considerable size and age which will be inevitably harmed in the development

House was built C.1850 and should be preserved as part of Rainhill’s heritage In a designated conservation area, is an asset to the local area and could be

restored Rainhill seems to be under fire from developers, removal of old houses and over

development of the sites will rob the area of its heritage and history, changing the nature and heritage of Rainhill

Proposal does not protect the preservation values in Rainhill conservation area, Rock House has an important history and character

Rainhill village has much to offer in the way of historical features and it is a great pity that a fine example of Georgian architecture has to be sacrificed, refurbishment would enable exterior features to be retained.

3 storey building with 8 apartments, the size and height of the premises is blatantly out of keeping with existing residential arrangements creating an eyesore


P/2015/0902/FUL

A local historian who can place Rock House as the family home (and numerous other buildings within Rainhill) to an historically prominent local Rainhill family – the Owens.

Not clear from the materials spec if they would be in keeping with aesthetic and character of the road

The Council have a vigilant policy with regards to protected trees which should be adhered to, not allowing the carefree removal to accommodate the development.

The local area is green with mature gardens and trees, the development does not include green space and would be detrimental to local environment

Only 9 spaces for 16 bedrooms, nose to tail spaces unrealistic in a communal area. No visitor spaces and several spaces require entry via awkward one way system. One disabled space is unlikely to be sufficient in a house with a lift

Several of the spaces require entry from the one way system which is awkward in the extreme, with lift access, one disabled space unlikely to be sufficient. There is little turning space for deliveries etc.

Parking on the road should be discouraged Not enough space to provide 16 parking spaces for 8 apartments, resulting in

parking on St James Road One way traffic from View Road to St James Road would be dangerous, roads are

not suitable for increased volume of traffic Demolition and rebuilding of sandstone walls to allow builders access is not

acceptable The site should not be allowed to deteriorate any further but overspill of cars

parking at the roadside should not be allowed, roads are already congested Encouraging on street parking for new developments is astounding, development

sits on the brew of a steep hill and is extremely dangerous, it is commonly used as a cut through hence the Council previously suggesting traffic calming

Inadequate car parking spaces available to residents and visitors will cause an out of keeping overspill of parking onto St James Road.

If this objection is not successful, the new building should be in keeping with the surrounding architecture.

Rainhill Civic Society: Objection raised, loss of an historic house, overdevelopment of the site, 6 flats would be more in keeping and allow more space for parking, no provision for visitor parking, retention of sandstone wall, windows and quality materials.

5. SITE HISTORY

P/2014/0884 Conversion of existing dwelling house into 4no self contained apartments, removal of one chimney, new pitched roof to existing two storey side extension, re-rendering of external elevations with insulating render.Withdrawn

6. POLICY

National Planning Policy Framework6.1 The National Planning Policy Framework states that local planning authorities should

approach decision taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development. It further states that in determining development proposals, the presumption in favour of sustainable development should be applied and further reiterates the requirements of planning law that applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In decision taking, proposals that accord with the development plan should be approved without delay.


P/2015/0902/FUL

Development Plan6.2 The adopted development plan for St Helens is the St Helens Local Plan Core

Strategy (adopted 2012); saved policies in the St Helens Unitary Development Plan (adopted 1998); and the Joint Merseyside and Halton Waste Local Plan (adopted 2013).

Policies of the Core Strategy Local Plan (2012)CP 1 - Ensuring Quality Development in St. HelensCP 2 -Creating an Accessible St. HelensCH 1 - Meeting St. Helens' Housing RequirementCH 2 -Meeting St. Helens' Housing NeedsCQL 2 - Trees and WoodlandsCQL 4 - Heritage and Landscape

Saved Policies of the St. Helens Unitary Development Plan (1998)ENV 11 - Tree SurveysENV 12A - Development Affecting Existing TreesENV 12B - Development Affecting Existing TreesENV 13 - New Tree Planting on Development SitesENV 24B - Development in Conservation Areas

Other Considerations6.3 The application has been considered having regard to Article 1 of the First Protocol of

the Human Rights Act 1998, which sets out a persons rights to the peaceful enjoyment of property and Article 8 of the Convention of the same Act which sets out his/her rights in respect for private and family life and for the home. Officers consider that the proposed development would not be contrary to the provisions of the above Articles in respect of the human rights of surrounding residents/occupiers.

6.4 This application has been considered in relation to Section 17 of The Crime and Disorder Act. The Police Crime Prevention Officer has been afforded the opportunity to comment on this scheme, but no comments have been received.

6.5 The application has been considered in accordance with the St Helens Council’s Comprehensive Equality Policy, which seeks to prevent unlawful discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and good relations between people in a diverse community. In this case the proposed development is not anticipated to have any potential impact from an equality perspective.

7. ASSESSMENT

Principle of the Development7.1 Rock House is located in Rainhill Conservation Area 2 and is also located within the

defined Residential Character Area of Rainhill. The building is not listed and is in poor condition as is evidenced by the recently submitted photographic structural / condition report.

7.2 An application was submitted in 2014 for the refurbishment of this dwelling and conversion into a number of self contained flats. The works required to bring the building up to current habitable regulation standards were significant and included an external thermal cladding system to insulate the building. This system consisted of 10cm thick polystyrene covered with a thin layer of render affixed to the exterior of the building; with similar feature ‘stick on’ detailing affixed to the thermal cladding to mimic the original detailing. Such works would have completely obliterated the external historic character of the dwelling and the existing visual characterful feature detailing would be lost.


P/2015/0902/FUL

7.3 Modern processes designed to mimic the older character of a building very rarely result in an acceptable compromise; very often, it looks like what it is – a poor substitute that resembles neither historic nor modern character. This poor finish would draw the eye, resulting in an incongruous addition to the detriment of the local character and the conservation area.

7.4 The application was therefore withdrawn on that basis and applicant engaged in discussions for a replacement building. The proposal is for demolition of the existing 2 storey building and the erection of a 2½ storey building for 8No. 2 bed flats, with 13 off street parking spaces.

7.5 Designated Conservation Areas (CA) are "areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance". The designation gives control over the demolition of buildings and provides the basis for policies designed to preserve or enhance aspects of character or appearance that define an area's special interest.

7.6 St James Road also falls with the Rainhill Residential Character Area (RCA), which is described as an area of most house types and styles (bungalows, semi’s and detached) of varied design and character. Most houses are two storey and the architectural quality of buildings is mixed (gable fronting facades, bay windows and dormers). The area has a mature feel, is quiet in nature with mature gardens and street trees. Red sandstone front boundary walls with sandstone copings tending to dominate the area; this consistency adds to the quality of the area and helps reinforce the street scene creating visual cohesion in contrast to the various buildings behind.

7.7 The application site having the designation of being within a CA and an RCA does not result in an automatic objection to the demolition and replacement of buildings – particularly if the building in question is not listed. However, it does give Local Authorities added weight in decision making; ensuring that new development is of a particularly high standard in terms of design, materials and finishing details.

7.8 Most of the residential buildings in the local area are detached dwellings of various styles and sizes; with the very occasional flatted development. This site is wide across the front (45m) but much shallower in depth (27m) comparative to neighbouring residential plots; and the close proximity of Rocklands to the rear (12.5m) constrains the development potential of the site due to a significant shortfall in interface (privacy) distances. This is an existing constraint with the existing house, and in that context some relaxation of the policy could be justified. However, the redevelopment of this site for flats would better manage interface / overlooking, ensuring that the building is designed so that rooms to the rear are not considered to be habitable.

Design and Layout7.9 The design of the proposed building would be very different from the building it would

replace with three prominent gable fronts dominating the character of the front elevation, supported by a uniform window arrangement, including bay windows and two comparatively small dormer windows in the roof. This style is also evident to the sides and rear elevation. The footprint of the new building is larger at 25m wide by 13m deep - almost twice the size of the footprint of the existing dwelling. It is noted that the application site is 45m wide by 27m deep, the new building would be set in 6.5m from the shared boundary to the south and 12m to the north.

7.10 Despite the increased width of the proposed building, significant separation distances between dwellings would be retained. The front sandstone boundary wall with hedgerow behind would also be protected during development and retained as


P/2015/0902/FUL

existing; both of which represent the significant visual character associated with this part of both the CA and RCA. The design features as proposed for the building are also feature characteristics prevalent throughout the local area. The high quality materials proposed – slate, red brick, natural stone plinths, cills and heads, sliding sash windows, combined with the design – gable fronts, bay windows, small dormers, are all in keeping with the quality characterful setting as described in the RCA supplementary planning document and the CA.

7.11 Rocklands is a large office with up to 50 staff and also falls within the ownership of the applicant. To the rear, the new building would sit 12.5m away from the rear elevation of Rocklands. It is noted that the existing dwelling also has a similar relationship in terms of interface. Interface distances of 23m habitable room window to habitable room window and 12.5m habitable room window to blank gable should be maintained. However, all of the windows in the new building facing this elevation would either be secondary (alternative main windows in the room) or non habitable rooms (bathroom / utility). On that basis, interface distance is considered to be acceptable.

7.12 Main habitable room windows in side elevations have the greatest potential for increasing overlooking to unacceptable levels; such windows are proposed in both first and second floors. However, in this instance, it is noted that the new building is set in 12m from the shared boundary with 88 St James Road to the north; the overlooking windows sit forward of the front elevation or overlook the side elevation of that property; the angles almost at 90o degrees means that overlooking into any habitable room would not be feasible and to the rear, acute angles for overlooking and significant landscaping screening limits potential overlooking, ensures appropriate privacy within the rear garden would be maintained. To the south, the new building is set in 6.5m from the shared boundary with the rear of 27 View Road (which incorporates 106 St James Road within its curtilage), the land is hard surfaced and open with thick landscaping on this boundary.

7.13 It is also noted that this part of St James Road is slightly graded with the centre point of the proposed building being at street level; resulting in the land being slightly raised to the north (building slightly higher) and slightly excavated to the south (building slightly lower).

The application proposes 8No. residential units in a single building. The St Helens Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (adopted January 2010) (SPD), states that developments of five or more units should make provision for an affordable housing contribution of 30%. Alternatively, a Viability Assessment should be submitted. The SPD also states that on sites of 5 - 14 units a commuted sum in lieu of on site provision may be acceptable. For sites of 15 or more units, on site provision would be the preferred option.

Affordable Housing7.14 The applicant submitted a Viability Assessment in order to ensure that a full affordable

housing contribution would be reasonable and necessary comparative to the financial viability of the development.

7.15 The applicant has submitted a viability assessment to assess the 8No. units within this application site. After fully considering the assessment, the Council’s retained consultants are of the opinion that the proposed scheme may be capable of supporting an affordable housing contribution of £42,064.50, however, this is subject to each of the flats commanding a sales value at the higher end of the spectrum and the applicant has indicated that the scheme could not proceed on this basis. However, if values are received above the anticipated level, the developer would pay all of the increased value up to the value of £42,064.50. The


P/2015/0902/FUL

applicant has agreed to the drawing up of a S106 so that sales values can be re-assessed at the time of sales.

Car Parking / Highways7.16 Neighbours have raised concerns due to the majority of parking spaces for the

proposed flats being accessed via the one way system from View Road; and the likelihood of vehicles parking on St James Road, to the detriment of highway safety.

7.17 Supplementary Planning Document ‘Ensuring Choice for Travel’ sets out the maximum parking standards required as a result of a proposed development. For flats, 1.5No. parking spaces per unit (150%) should be provided. The development proposes 8No. units and 13No off street parking spaces - which equates to 160% provision; in excess of the Council’s current parking standards.

7.18 Three off street parking spaces would be accessed via St James Road, one of which would be a tandem space; however, vehicular access for the remaining spaces - both the application site and Rocklands (to the west (behind)) is via a one way system with the entrance being on View Road and vehicles driving through the site to exit onto St James Road. The current vehicular system provides access, parking and egress for the staff occupying the large office in Rocklands. This one way system would be retained as part of this development, however, it could be better signed. Permission can be conditioned to ensure the introduction of better signage / policing within the site.

7.19 Rocklands sits approximately 3m higher (protected by a retaining sandstone wall of a similar height) than View Road. The creation of a new exit onto View Road is not feasible, nor desired due to the detriment that it could cause to the character of the CA and RCA. Likewise with regard to the application site, to permit vehicular access and egress from St James Road alone would result in the loss of part of the sandstone wall, hedgerow and all of the grassed area to the front of the dwelling. This established frontage has already been identified as very significant to the character of the area would not be acceptable due to the harm created to both the CA and RCA.

7.20 No changes are proposed to the sandstone wall, hedgerow and raised landscaped garden fronting St James Road.

Protected Trees7.21 The application site is located within Rainhill 2 Conservation Area, this designation

protects trees from removal without informing the local planning authority. In addition, Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) protects a number of trees outside of the Rock House application site (some of which are located within Rocklands and 88 St James Road adjacent).

7.22 A number of non protected trees will be felled to accommodate this proposal, with replacement trees to be planted as part of an agreed landscape strategy. The protected (TPO) trees within the adjacent properties would not be impacted as part of this development as no development is proposed within this part of the application site.

8. CONCLUSION

8.1 The loss of this house is unfortunate, particularly in the context of the historic significance of the original owners and the village of Rainhill (as clarified by local historians); however, the building is in poor condition, it is not listed, nor is it of significant character so as to warrant listed status. The replacement building would of a high standard in terms of design and finishing materials, picking up many of the


P/2015/0902/FUL

aesthetic features prevalent in the local area; the character of which predominantly consists of bespoke larger dwellings on heavily landscaped plots with very strong boundary frontages. The existing strong boundary frontage, including the hedgerow, would be retained and trees to be removed would be replaced. Off street parking in accordance with Council policies would be provided.

8.2 The proposed development complies with the policies contained in the St Helens Core Strategy (2012) and retained policies in the Unitary Development Plan (1998) which expect new development to maintain or enhance the overall character and appearance of the local environment; be sympathetic to surrounding land uses and make efficient use of existing infrastructure and services. New development should be located on sites that are already well served by infrastructure including good public transport links and safe pedestrian / cycle access. New residential development should ensure that the overall scale and design are appropriate to the character of an area, sufficient separation distances for light and privacy are included and appropriate off street parking is provided.

9. RECOMMENDATION

9.1 Grant Planning Permission Subject to the following conditions:

1. The works hereby permitted must be begun within 3 years of the date of this decision notice.

2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following application drawings: Tree Survey, Dwg No. P.582.15.02 Rev A Landscape Proposals, Dwg No. P.582.15.03 Rev A Tree Protection, Dwg No. P.582.15.04 Rev A Proposed Block Plan, Dwg No. 1419 PL 011 Rev F Proposed Site Plan, Dwg No. 1419 PL 012 Rev G Proposed Ground Floor Plan, Dwg No. 1419 PL 013 Rev D Proposed First Floor Plan, Dwg No. 1419 PL 014 Rev D Proposed 2nd Floor Plan, Dwg No. 1419 PL 015 Rev E Proposed Street Elevation, Dwg No. 1419 PL 016 Rev D Proposed Elevations, Dwg No. 1419 PL 017 Rev F Proposed Site Section, Dwg No. 1419 PL 019 Rev - Proposed Protection Plan, Dwg No. 1419 PL 020 Rev B

3. Prior to their use on site, details of the proposed facing materials shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the agreed materials. In particular, and notwithstanding the detail shown on the approved plans listed in condition 2, windows and doors shall be finished in timber.

4. The proposed development is within 250m of a known landfill site. Before the commencement of the development, all reasonable steps shall be taken to investigate the possibility of gas migration affecting the site. The survey methods are to be agreed in advance with the Local Planning Authority and a copy of the survey results shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority as soon as they are available. Where gas migration is confirmed, or evidence to suggest that it is likely to occur, the development shall not commence until remedial measures have been taken to control and manage the gas, to monitor the effectiveness of these measures and, where necessary to incorporate adequate precautionary measures in the design and construction stages. Such measures shall be agreed


P/2015/0902/FUL

in writing with the Local Planning Authority before the implementation commences.

5. The development shall not be brought into use until the areas indicated on the submitted plans to be set aside for parking and servicing have been surfaced, drained and permanently marked out or demarcated in accordance with the details and specifications shown. The parking and servicing areas shall be retained as such thereafter.

6. The tandem parking spaces identified as spaces 2 and 3 on plan reference 1419 PL 012 Rev G shall be allocated and clearly demarcated as such, for the specific use of the occupiers of the ground floor flat immediately adjacent to the parking spaces; unless a minor variation is as otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

7. No development shall take place until details of wheel wash facilities for all vehicles visiting the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include plan(s) showing the location(s) of the facilities, hours of operation and technical specifications of plant and equipment. Thereafter the wheel wash facilities shall be installed and operated in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise approved by the Council as Local Planning Authority.

8. Before commencement of development hereby permitted, a method statement to identify and illustrate the use of Reasonable Avoidance Measures to be implemented to avoid harm to bats shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be completed in accordance with the agreed details.

9. Should this permission be implemented after August 2016, before commencement of any works, an updated bat roost inspection should be undertaken by a suitably qualified person and submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be completed in accordance with the agreed details thereafter.

10. Before first occupation of any of the residential units hereby permitted, improved signage to provide clear vehicular direction to residents / staff / visitors, moving through the operational one way system and within the site associated with the Rocklands / Rock House shall be provided; in accordance with details which shall have first been submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be completed in accordance with the agreed details and retained as such thereafter.

11. The sandstone boundary wall and hedgerow fronting View Road and the attached return internal wall for a distance of 4.8m from St James Road shall be retained as existing and shall not be removed or altered in any way. Protection measures as identified in plan reference 1419 PL 020 Rev B shall be fully implemented before commencement of any development and be retained as identified for the entirety of the construction works.

12. Landscaping on the site shall be completed prior to any part of the development being brought into use, unless an alternative program of implementation has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. If any of the landscaping that is planted or shown as retained, dies, is removed, or, becomes seriously damaged or diseased within 5 years of the completion of the


P/2015/0902/FUL

landscaping scheme. It shall be replaced during the next available planting season.

14. The Tree Protection Measures shown in plan reference P.582.15.03 Rev A; shall be implemented prior to the commencement of development and shall be retained for the duration of the construction phase. During development, the areas identified shall be kept free of machinery, stored materials of all kinds and any form of ground disturbance.

15. Demolition and construction works shall not take place outside the following hours: Monday to Friday 07.30hrs - 18.00hrs; Saturday 08.00hrs - 13.00 hrs and; Not at all on Sunday and Bank Holidays.

10. IMAGES

Rock House


P/2015/0902/FUL

Rock House front garden

Rock House rear elevation

Rocklands rear / side elevation


P/2015/0902/FUL

One way entrance from View Road

Entrance on View Road


P/2015/0902/FUL

One way exit from the site onto St James Road

Exit on St James Road

Planning Committee 24/05/2016 landscaping and parking...

Documents

Transcript of Planning Committee 24/05/2016 landscaping and parking...