Two self-build dwellings at Land Adjacent To 49 Church Lane, Ravenstone

What was proposed

Permission in principle was sought for two residential self-build dwellings on agricultural grazing land measuring 0.38 hectares.

“This application is made under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Permission in Principle) (Amendment) Order 2017 (as amended). The proposal seeks permission in principle (PIP) for two residential self-build dwellings on land adjacent to 49 Church Lane which is currently used as agricultural grazing land and measures 0.38 hectares. The site is located outside the defined Limits to Development.”

Officer report

Planning history

The site has no relevant planning history, while two neighbouring dwellings were previously permitted on the adjacent site.

“There is no relevant planning history for the site.”

“The adjacent site consisting of two recently constructed dwellings was permitted under applications 23/00870/FUL and 23/01458/VCU which was for the “Demolition of existing building and erection of two dwellings and associated access and parking areas”.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because self-build housing would address a significant shortfall, while the identified harms would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

“The adopted Local Plan is silent on the matter of self-build housing and in this circumstance, as set out earlier in this report, paragraph 11(dii) of the NPPF (as set out at the time of decision) would apply which states that 'where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out-of-date, granting permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh…”

“The proposed development would contribute towards the supply of self-build plots where there is an identified shortfall and the Local Planning Authority is failing in its statutory duty to provide enough self-build plots in order to meet demand. There is a shortfall of 31 self-build plots in the District for the current base period.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

Highways raised no objection, while eight third-party objections concerned countryside development, appearance, highways, amenity, biodiversity, grazing land and flooding.

“Eight third party representation (objections) have been received. The comments raised are summarised as follows.”

“The site is in the countryside and outside of the defined limits to development and is therefore not appropriate location.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent supported approval, while the ward member raised concerns about congestion near the A447, Church Lane and Wash Lane junction.

Members’ discussion

Members supported the application, found no significant issues beyond the ward member’s concerns, and discussed the number of homes and junction improvements.

“As part of a discussion, members expressed support for the application and asked several questions of clarity which were addressed by the planning officers. Members commented that they could not see any issues with the application except for those raised by the ward member. It was suggested that the number of dwellings should have been limited to two as applied for.”

“Members asked whether a note could have been provided to the applicant which involved considering trying to improve the junction at Wash Lane and Church Lane. The Principal Planning Officer advised members that a note could be included but added that the applicant could not have been bound to any expectations at this stage.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor R Canny moved approval, Councillor J Legrys seconded it, and the recorded votes were all in favour.

“It was moved by Councillor R Canny, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and…”

“Chair’s initials Motion to approve the application in accordance with the officer's recommendations. (Motion) Councillor Russell Boam For Councillor Ray Morris For Councillor Rachel Canny For Councillor David Everitt For Councillor John Legrys For Councillor Peter Moult For Councillor Carol Sewell For Councillor Jenny Simmons For Councillor Doug Cooper For Councillor Michael Wyatt For Councillor Andrew Woodman For Carried…”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application in accordance with the officer’s recommendation.

“The application be approved in accordance with the officer’s recommendations.”

Minutes