Agenda item
- Meeting of Planning Committee, Tuesday, 8th July, 2025 5.00 pm (Item 21.)
- View the background to item 21.
Construction of new single storey dwelling with associated three bay cart lodge, parking and turning area.
Minutes:
Earlier on in the meeting as reported under Minute 18 above, Councillor White had declared for the public record that he had not attended the site visit for this application. He therefore remained in the room but did not take part in the deliberations and decision making on this application.
The Committee heard that planning permission (ref. 21/01718/FUL) had been granted on 17 April 2024 for the construction of a two-bedroom bungalow on a smaller site, with a three-year implementation timeframe. That permission remained extant and was considered by Officers to carry significant weight in the planning balance, despite the site being located outside any designated Settlement Development Boundary (SDB). The current proposal sought to replace this with a larger, two-bedroom dwelling on an expanded site, incorporating substantial landscape enhancements. Crucially, the net effect remained a single dwelling in this location. From a general sustainability standpoint, the overall impact was considered by Officers to be comparable to that of the approved two-bedroom bungalow.
Members were told that the proposed development involved the removal of unsightly existing structures and was regarded by Officers as a more effective and visually appropriate use of the land compared to the extant approval. The scheme would have no adverse impact on residential amenity, and the access and highway safety implications remained broadly in line with the extant approval. Subject to conditions, the proposal was also considered by Officers to offer landscape and biodiversity benefits that arguably exceeded those of the previously approved scheme.
The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.
At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Team Leader (JJ) in respect of the application.
There were no updates circulated to Members on this application.
There were no public speakers on this application.
|
Matters raised by Members of the Committee:- |
Officer’s response thereto:- |
|
The fallback position sets a precedent that it is acceptable in planning terms to develop this site against planning policy; can you explain to me why that is? |
Because there is planning permission in place on the site, which was only granted last year, it has a three-year time limit, this means in planning terms a two-bedroom dwelling has been granted here. In terms of sustainability, it is a key material consideration and has considerable weight, mainly because the planning permission remains extant and there is a realistic prospect of that planning permission being implemented. If you were looking purely at the spatial planning policies and the Local Plan, the development here is not supported by the Local Plan. It is strongly advised to Members to not ignore the material planning considerations because the Town and Country Planning Act makes it clear that Members should have regard to all planning considerations. A dwelling is on its way and the principle of development here is acceptable. |
|
Do Members have to have regard to the material planning considerations? |
By law, Members must have regard to material planning considerations. If Members take into consideration something that is not a material planning consideration or fail to take into account something that is a planning consideration, then the decision would be open to be challenged. Material planning consideration is legally required. |
|
Are there any updates on the representations? |
Since the publication of the report (A.2), there have been no further correspondence or third-party consultations received. The Lawford Parish Council response has been covered and addressed within the report. |
It was moved by Councillor Alexander, seconded by Councillor Smith and unanimously:-
RESOLVED that:
1) the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions as stated at paragraph 10.1 of the Officer report (A.2), or varied as is necessary to ensure the wording is enforceable, precise, and reasonable in all other respects, including appropriate updates, so long as the principle of the conditions as referenced is retained; and
2) the sending of any informative notes to the applicant as may be deemed necessary.
Supporting documents:
PDF 287 KB