Two dwellings at Land South Of 85 - 95 Knights End Road, March

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for up to two dwellings, with all matters reserved, individual accesses, detached garages and rear private amenity space.

“This application is an outline application with all matters reserved for the erection of up to 2 dwellings at Land South of 85-95 Knights End Road, March.”

“Whilst the application is outline in nature, with all matters reserved, an indicative site plan has been provided that shows two large dwellings, with detached garages and individual accesses. Taking in to account the site is is considered that this is likely to be the broadly in line with any subsequent reserved matters application.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is agricultural land accessed from Linwood Lane, beside existing homes, open countryside, trees and vegetation, and lies in Flood Zone 1.

“The application site is situated on Land South of 85-89 Knights End Road, within the market town of March. The site is accessed via Linwood Lane.”

Officer report

Why officers advised refusal

Officers considered the indicative layout would create backland development, urbanise open rural land, harm visual amenity and leave habitat losses insufficiently addressed.

“The development of two large dwellings, with detached garages and individual accesses as indicated on the indicative site plan, would create a backland form of development, and would result in urbanisation and encroachment into the existing rural character and openness of the area.”

“The proposed development, by virtue of its location away from the public highway, behind an existing, road-fronting and linear form of development, would result in a form of development does not reflect the wider character and appearance of the area, and would result in urbanisation and encroachment into the existing rural character and openness of the area.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The town council supported approval subject to drainage, while highways, the definitive map team, environmental health and arboriculture raised no objections or set out requirements.

“Thank you for consulting with the Definitive Map team at the County Council on…”

“The Environmental Health Team note and accept the submitted information and have 'No Objections' to the proposal, as it is unlikely to have a detrimental effect on local air quality, be affected by ground contamination or adversely impact the local amenity due to excessive artificial lighting.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector spoke for nearby residents, while the agent argued that the site was within planned growth, fronted a highway and could achieve biodiversity gain.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed backland development, biodiversity information, consultation, drainage, flooding and whether the access road could serve the proposed homes.

“[name withheld] responded that Linwood Lane is a highway open to traffic and this proposal fronts that highway much like the development over the road fronts the highway so, in her opinion, it is not backland development and the completion of a street. Councillor Mrs French disagreed as, in her view, looking at the map, it is clearly backland development.”

“[name withheld] reiterated that they would deal with drainage naturally under the Building Regulations. • Councillor Benney referred to the land flooding and made the point there is no drainage strategy and asked will a drainage strategy be submitted at the reserved matters stage? He made the point that members hear on lots of applications on fields that they flood but a drainage strategy resolves this issue when they are built on.”

Minutes

The vote

A proposal to refuse the application in line with the officer recommendation was moved, seconded and agreed.

“Proposed by Councillor Gerstner, seconded by Councillor Mrs French and agreed that the application be REFUSED as per officer’s recommendation.”

Minutes