THE DEMOLITION of an existing property and the erection of a new residential dwelling in its place with ‘associated building works’ has been rejected by Cornwall Council’s planning team.
The planning authority has refused the application for the property known as Portscatho, Dobbin Close, Trevone, Padstow, made by Mr Wayne Adams.
Padstow Town Council, as part of the consultation process that comes as part of the planning application indicated that it supported the works on the condition there is no roof terrace.
There was also a strong objection on behalf of the owners of an adjoining property, Gulland House, who issued an objection letter through their representatives Influence Planning.
In the objection, it was stated: “Influence Planning have been instructed by Mr and Mrs Keeble (hereafter referred to as the Client) of ‘Gulland House’ to submit an objection in relation to the above planning application for a replacement dwelling at ‘Porthscatho’ a bungalow located beyond the eastern boundary of their property. Gulland House is my Client’s family home and is lived in all year round, it is not a second home and the impact of the neighbouring development would have a significant and adverse impact upon their quality of life and would have a detrimental impact upon the level of amenity they experience for the reasons that will be explained below.
“To provide some context, back in December 2018 the garden of Porthscatho was subdivided and outline planning permission was granted for a new additional dwelling in the garden under reference PA18/06270. This property is now built and shown as ‘La Mer’ on the submitted plans. The existing original bungalow at ‘Portscatho’ is single storey with a pitched roof and has seemingly been purchased by the current Applicant’s who according to the Planning Application Form are based in Lichfield, Staffordshire.
“There is a strong possibility that this property will end up used as a holiday home, a matter that is currently outside of the scope of the planning regime (as acknowledged in the recently adopted Padstow NDP at Para 9.5). The key issue in terms of this objection is the fact that the proposed dwelling is for a two storey contemporary design which includes significantly more openings facing my Client’s property but also, and fundamentally, reverse accommodation with the main living areas (living and dining) at first floor level which includes a large external roof terrace.
“The implications of this in such close proximity to the boundary is devastating and would simply create a totally unacceptable level of overlooking that could not reasonably be mitigated within the current design. No additional screens or high level windows could be provided to overcome this objection.
“The first floor of the south west elevation with the significant tranche of large windows and sliding doors, combined with the roof terrace, will enable the future occupants to look directly down into the main private amenity area of Gulland House. As can be seen on the photograph above the existing patio of Gulland House would be directly overlooked from the new replacement dwelling.
“The patio is currently very private and is in this location because it is sheltered from the winds that come in off the north coast. Therefore, whilst Gulland House does have a relatively large garden area associated with the property, this is currently the only private patio area usable and protected from the elements.
“The relevant Development Plan documents for the area consist of both the Cornwall Local Plan – Strategic Policies 2010-2030 (CLP) and the Padstow Neighbourhood Development Plan 2018-2030 (PNDP) adopted September 2022.
“The Cornwall Local Plan contains a number of policies that seek to ensure the appropriate development takes place in the right locations. Policy 2 – Spatial Strategy. a) Ensuring the design of a development is high quality and demonstrates a cultural, physical and aesthetic understanding of its location. Policy 12 – Design.
This is a detailed design policy which encourages development to ‘maintain and enhance the distinctive natural and historic character of Cornwall’.
“This advises the design process should ‘clearly consider the existing context, and how the development contributes to the social, economic and environmental elements of sustainability principles’.
“The policy then details how character is important with development being of an appropriate ‘scale, density, layout, height and mass’ with a clear understanding and response to its landscape.
“The introduction of a two storey dwelling, with reverse accommodation, (main living space at first floor) and the abundance of glazing and balconies would lead to the introduction of significant and unacceptable overlooking into the grounds of Gulland House. This is not a situation where there is established mutual overlooking, existing properties have privacy as a result of the relatively low levels and sensitive locations of windows and openings (especially at first floor level).
“The proposal will create unacceptable overlooking of Gulland House being totally in conflict with the intent of Policy 12 of the CLP. The Cornwall Design Guide – December 2021.
“The latest version of the Design Guide is scant on detail in terms of relationships with neighbouring properties and seemsto focus on high level strategic design concepts.
“However, in saying this Section 9 ‘Homes and Buildings’ at 9.3 ‘Outlook, Light and Privacy’ states: 9.3.5: The layout ensures adequate levels of privacy and outlook for occupants of the new housing and existing residents surrounding the site and facilitates natural surveillance of communal and public spaces.
“9.3.6: Design avoids home-to-home views. If homes are facing each other over a short distance, the placement of windows should be designed to reduce overlooking into other homes.
“The design guide appears to touch on the concept of overlooking within the design stages of a scheme, in this instance the harm arising from the first floor of the new developments windows and roof terrace would conflict with the intent of the Cornwall Design Guide.
“It is apparent that this poorly conceived scheme for a replacement dwelling, with substantial tranches of glazing/openings and first floor roof terrace, will be unacceptably harmful to the amenity and privacy experienced by occupiers of Gulland House significantly conflicting with the intent of Policy 12 of the Cornwall Local Plan and the Cornwall Design Guide 2021.
“ On behalf of my Client I urge you to refuse this planning application for a replacement dwelling due to the clear policy conflict and overlooking impacts arising in this case as explained in this representation
Cornwall Council agreed with the objections raised by the Keebles, opting to object the application on the following grounds: “The development if permitted due to its scale and design with particular reference to the first floor openings and terrace would give rise to harm to the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring property, namely Gulland House in terms of overlooking and loss of privacy to the rear outside amenity space which serves as the principal outside sitting area and which would spoil the enjoyment of this property and would not be adequately mitigated by the measures proposed. It would therefore be contrary to Policy 12 of the Cornwall Local Plan 2010-2030, Policy PAD6 (1) of the Padstow Neighbourhood Development Plan 2018-2030 and the National Planning Policy Framework 2021, paragraph 130 (f)”
PA23/01659: PLANS for an off-road parking space and the installation of an electric car charging point in Launceston has been refused by Cornwall Council’s planning department.
S Longthorp had submitted an application to Cornwall Council for a property on St Stephens Hill, St Stephens, Launceston.
It drew objections from residents nearby on the grounds of both loss of amenity and the listed building status of the property, although it had the support of Launceston Town Council.
Mr Robert Wilson said: “This application would result in the loss of a parking space on the public highway St Stephens Hill. There is already a shortage of parking spaces, particularly towards the lower part of the hill. It would unfairly prejudice those not having the space for off street parking, particularly elderly residents.
On the accompanying application for listed building status permission, also refused he said: “The application would result in a development out of keeping with the St Stephens Hill Conservation Area and would detract from the character of the Listed Building and other nearby listed buildings.”
Mr Brian Laseby added: “No. 5 St. Stephens Hill is a Grade 2 Listed building.
“No. 5 St. Stephens Hill lies within a Conservation area. Changing anything will set a precedent.”
Mrs T Hipkin, however suggested that the objections were due to the neighbours ‘losing a parking space’. Expressing support for the plans, she wrote: “We support this application. Although it would appear that the neighbours would lose a parking space, in fact if this application is not successful then there is the potential to lose more than one parking space as the owner(s) would need to also find space to park on the hill, thus creating more issues with parking.
“We also support the creation of an electric charging point as trying to reduce emissions is more important than an argument of a parking space.
“We would love to be able to have the choice of someone to charge our car, but don’t have that gift, so I would support someone else having the ability to have this facility.
“The issue of the lack of residential parking on the hill is extremely long-standing and a newcomer should not be penalised for historical issues. Indeed, this should be addressed by the Highways Department.”
In refusing the application, Cornwall Council told the applicant: “The proposed removal of a section of walling and the creation and subsequent use of a new off-road parking space within the front garden of this Grade II listed building would result in less-than-substantial harm to the appearance, character and setting and significance of listed heritage assets and their contribution to the historic environment within this part of the conservation area which is considered to outweigh the perceived public or social benefit of creating one more off-road parking space.
“As such, the proposed development conflicts with the provisions, aims and intentions of Policies 24, 12 and 1 of the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies 2010-2030, and the National Planning Policy Framework 2021, with particular reference to paragraphs 8, 130, 189, 194, 195, 197, 199, 200 and 202.”