Planning – Application Comments

Please see Documents Tab for Parish Council Comments

To whom it may concern
I would like to lodge a strong objection to this planning application for the following reasons:
1) Hookhams Lane is an important entry into the semi rural village of Renhold and this proposal would have a negative impact on the current semi rural street scene.
2) Hookhams Lane is characterised by hedges, grass verges and low rise buildings. Hedging has already been removed to accommodate the two new dwellings and more hedging would disappear were this application to be approved.
3) The two new dwellings are much too large for the plot and the result is overdevelopment. Any more building there would be totally unacceptable as it would break the existing build line and would urbanise the area.

I offer this comment as a member of the Renhold Neighbourhood Plan Working group and therefore an informed contributor.
This property is one of 2 brand new homes squeezed into a tight site leaving little space for further development - particularly on this constrained plot. Whilst designed with an internal single garage and a coordinated and efficient modern internal layout on 2 floors, the new owner has already declared it unsuited to his needs unless the internal design is varied to convert the existing garage to a 5th bedroom. To permit this and much more the owner wishes to construct a double garage with hobby accommodation above between the house and Hookhams Lane which would destroy the visual set back provided by all adjacent properties in the critical approach to and departure from the village.
Worse still is the intent to incorporate a roof ridge line to this double story garage which at 5.851m in height is taller than the house side roof extending over its internal garage. The effect will be disastrous to the street scene and it is difficult to comprehend how the architects who have presided over both the house design and this unwelcome extension can excuse the lame and irrelevant 'statement of need' they have provided in support.
This application should be determined at committee to avoid the risk of it being slipped through using delegated powers. Even if the upper story is dispensed with the residual bulk of a double garage should still not be tolerated in front of the well-defined building line.
The application and any variation of it should be refused permission.

Renhold is a parish mainly characterised by hedgerows. The bungalow the subject of this application was one of 2 given permission against the wishes of the Parish Council and local residents, as it would urbanise the entrance to the parish. Although the completed bungalows do seem to fit in well the builder removed most of the hedgerow along the front of the site. The only remaining length is where this application probably seeks to remove it or sufficiently damage the roots that it doesn't survive.
The proposed building raises a number of questions.
Why did the applicant purchase this property when he acknowledges from the outset that it doesn't meet his requirements ? Although he is downsizing he acknowledges that he will convert the existing garage to meet his [future] requirements.
He knew when he purchased the property it does not have provision for his cars. So it doesn't meet his requirements.
His answer is the proposed garage and hobby room, built on the boundary of the property to present a brick wall at the entrance to the village.
As I indicated above, the finished bungalows are quite fitting in the street scene and not bad to look at. With the proposed garage this bungalow will not be visible as you enter Renhold.
If he wants garaging for his cars, why does he have to have a hobby room above it, dramatically increasing the size of the building.
All of the dwellings on this side of the first length of Hookhams Lane are set well back and none has buildings in front of the dwellings. The proposed garage would set a precedent.
The proposed garage should be refused.

Dear Sirs,
I would like to object most strongly to the above planning application.
Hookhams Lane is very much a semi-rural linear development, with all dwellings set back from the road and they present a spacious quality within the street scene.
The recent development of this land with the construction of Numbers 80 and 82 Hookhams Lane followed this principal in general, but owing to the plot size, the properties are inevitably closer to the road than most adjacent properties and had this not been a renewal of an historic planning consent, would have been objected to in view of the emerging Neighbourhood Plan as negatively impacting the street scene and overdevelopment.
The current application is totally at odds with the street scene and clearly over-development on this small plot.
No account has been taken of the proximity of the trees on the adjoining property or the remains of the current front boundary hedge abutting the highways verge.
This proposed construction in front of the already fore-shortened building line, will erode the semi-rural view of the gateway entrance to the village and the visual benefits will be marred by a featureless end elevation on the highway boundary. The bulk and scale of the garage is incongruous and no amount of mitigation can compensate for this.
The supporting 'letter of need' clearly indicates that this new property does not meet the proposed needs of the new purchaser and over-development on this site is unjustified to meet a perceived need.
If granted it would set a precedent, which is unacceptable.
Please refuse.

PS The BBC Planning documentation, under "neighbours notified" indicates No 82 Hookhams Lane, which is actually this property, so should it be No 80 Hookhams Lane?

The application form does not acknowledge that trees and hedges are immediately adjoining the site and are within falling distance of the proposed garage. The proposed development, due to its siting, could adversely affect these features and their root protection zones. Boundary hedgerows along property frontages are important characteristics in Renhold, including along Hookhams Lane. As such, an arboricultural impact assessment is required with this application and should be requested from the applicant.

The proposed garage would be 5.8m high with the host property being 6.9m high. This is a significant height for an ancillary building, which is not essential given that there is adequate parking provision on site already. The applicant's justification for requiring this additional building is not a material planning consideration and certainly doesn't warrant the acceptability of this application. If storage for vintage/classic cars is required, then the applicant should have purchased a property that has appropriate storage/parking facilities in place. Clearly the existing property is not suitable to their needs.

Properties in this location and for the majority of Hookhams Lane are characterised by generous front gardens with no built form in front gardens. This set-back from the main road combined with the lack of built form within the front gardens affords a spacious quality to the streetscene which contributes positively to the neighbourhood.

The proposed garage is outside the existing pattern of development, and as such its location in the front garden will have a harmful impact on the spacious qualities of the streetscene. Furthermore, the road-facing side elevation with no windows does not provide any visual interest. It is also noted that the existing hard-surfaced area would need to be adjusted and increased in order to facilitate vehicular access to the proposed building. These two aspects would add to the harm caused to the character of the locality and streetscene.

Given the height and massing of the development, it is also not considered that any potential measures (e.g. additional landscaping) would be sufficiently able to mitigate the impact of the bulk and scale of the garage.

Policy 39 of the 2030 Local Plan relates to the retention of trees and notes that applicants shall consider opportunities to retain trees of high amenity and environmental value taking into consideration both their individual merit and their contribution as part of a group or broader landscape feature.
The proposed garage is within influencing distance of the roots of an adjoining tree and hedges, which make a positive contribution to the semi-rural character of this part of Renhold, as one approaches the village from the urban area of Bedford.

By virtue of the building's form, scale and location, the proposed development would constitute an incongruous feature within the streetscene and would have a harmful impact on the open, spacious quality of the neighbourhood, failing to enhance the character and quality of the surrounding area. The development would therefore be contrary to Policies 28S, 29 and 30 of the Bedford Borough Local Plan 2030, and Design Code E3 (Space around building) of the Council's adopted supplementary design guidance "Residential
Extensions, New Dwellings and Small Infill Developments - January 2000", and should therefore be refused.