Three-bedroom detached house at Land adjacent 79 Burgess Road, Southampton

What was proposed

The application proposed a detached two-storey three-bedroom house with associated parking, refuse and cycle storage, and two parking spaces.

“Proposal 2.1 The application proposes the construction of a detached, two-storey dwelling comprising 3 bedrooms. The proposal has been designed to retain the existing public footway. The proposal has been revised, during the course of the application to provide a 1.5 metre wide landscape strip adjacent to the public footway. Boundary treatment to the front of the property has also been reduced in height.”

“Two car parking spaces would be provided to the front of the dwelling along with storage for refuse and cycles and an air source heat pump. The existing tree to the Burgess Road frontage would be retained. Tracking diagrams have been provided to demonstrate that vehicles can manoeuvre on site.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The site is grassed land beside a residential road, with hedges, an adopted public footpath and a retained grass verge beside the route.

“The application site is a piece of land adjacent to no. 79 Burgess Road. The surrounding area is predominantly residential, comprising a mix of detached and semi-detached, two-storey dwellings within established plots. The site currently contains an adopted public footpath which links Pointout Close with Burgess Road. The remainder of the site is laid to grass with hedges to the site boundaries, which provides a green edge to the pedestrian route.”

Officer report

Earlier application

An earlier larger four-bedroom scheme was withdrawn after concerns about the site’s open character, footpath, hardstanding, habitat and biodiversity impacts.

“A previous application, reference 25/00260/FUL, proposed a larger four-bedroom detached dwelling with roof accommodation and associated parking. It was withdrawn on 17.06.2025 following officer concerns that the scheme would erode the landscaped, open character of the site and adjoining footpath corridor, reduce the attractiveness and perceived safety of the pedestrian route, introduce excessive frontage hardstanding, result in the loss of hedging/habitat, and fail to…”

“In addition to this, part of the developed area comprised adopted footway, meaning that development on that land would require stopping up. The current application…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the low-level open-space harm was outweighed by housing benefits and other effects could be controlled by conditions and an agreement.

“The revised scheme has reduced the scale and footprint of the earlier proposal and now retains a landscaped edge to the footpath, including part of the verge and boundary planting. Whilst the proposal would result in a net loss of open space, this would have a low impact, given the small nature of the open space and its limited function for recreation.”

“Taking the development plan as a whole, and applying the tilted balance under paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF, the adverse impacts of granting planning permission would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to the completion of the necessary legal agreement and the conditions set out below.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

Twenty-two representations raised concerns about open space, character, ecology, flooding, the footpath, parking, amenity, ownership, sustainability and construction impacts.

“The land is established informal green space and the development would harm local character, amenity and the open green setting beside the footpath. Response The site, although is not designated as a key open space within the adopted Development Plan, is open space in land use terms. Core Strategy Policy CS21 seeks to retain the quantity and improve the quality of all open spaces in the city and the proposal would be contrary to this policy.”

“Concerns are raised about existing flooding, standing water, sewer issues, and the risk that built form and hardstanding would worsen runoff or affect sewer infrastructure. Response The site is not at high risk from fluvial flooding but has had incidences of surface water flooding. As the scheme would replace grass land with built form, parking and hardstanding, suitable surface water management is required.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

Officers assessed the loss of open space, design, neighbouring amenity, highways, drainage, habitats, biodiversity and trees as the main issues.

“The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: - The principle of development and loss of open space - Design and effect on character - Residential amenity - Parking, highways and transport - Sustainability, drainage and flood risk - Likely effect on designated habitats - Biodiversity Net Gain, ecology and trees.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A residents’ association representative and a ward councillor addressed the Panel with the Chair’s consent.

What members considered

Officers told members that a flood risk assessment and drainage strategy were required before permission could be granted, updating the recommendation.

“Officers advised members that the Flood Risk Team have requested that the applicant undertakes a Flood Risk Assessment including a drainage strategy prior to any planning permission being granted. As a result, the recommendation was updated.”

Minutes

The vote

The Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment and carried the amended recommendation, with two members voting for, one against and two abstaining.

“Upon being put to the vote the Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment.”

“The Panel then considered recommendation that authority be delegated to the Director of Transport and Planning to grant planning permission subject to criteria listed in the report as amended. Upon being put to the vote the recommendation amended was carried.”

Minutes

The decision

Authority was delegated to grant permission, subject to the reported conditions, a legal agreement and a satisfactory flood risk assessment with drainage strategy.

“To confirm the Habitats Regulation Assessment set out in Appendix 1 of the report. 2. That authority be delegated to the Director of Transport and Planning to grant planning permission subject to the conditions in the report and any additional or amended conditions or planning obligations set out below, subject to: a) the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement or S.111 Legal Agreement to secure either a scheme of measures or a financial contribution to mitigate against the…”

“That the Director of Transport and Planning be given delegated powers to add, vary and/or delete relevant parts of the Section 106 agreement and/or conditions as necessary. 4. In the event that the legal agreement is not completed within a reasonable period following the Panel meeting, the Director of Transport and Planning be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.”

Minutes

Additional safeguards

The amended self-build condition requires the dwelling to be built or completed for occupation as the home of the individual or association who built it.

“Biodiversity Net Gain and Self build (Performance) The dwelling hereby permitted shall be built or completed by either (a) an individual; (b) an association of individuals; or (c) a person or persons working with or for an individual or association of individuals, who have built or completed the dwelling to occupy as their home.”

“Reason: To ensure that the dwelling is a self/custom build dwelling that is exempt from the mandatory biodiversity net gain requirements.”

Minutes