Self-build dwelling at Intwood Lodge, Intwood Lane, East Carleton

“Applicant’s Name: [name withheld] & [name withheld] Intwood Lodge Intwood Lane East Carleton Norfolk NR14 8LD Proposal Outline planning permission for subdivision of existing plot, maintaining existing vehicular access and detached double garage for 1no self-build detached two storey dwelling with all matters reserved.”

“The application seeks outline planning permission, with all matters reserved, for the subdivision of the residential curtilage of Intwood Lodge to facilitate the erection of one self-build detached two-storey dwelling. The proposal would retain the existing vehicular access serving the proposed new dwelling and the existing detached double garage.”

“The site forms part of a small cluster of residential properties along Pack Lane, comprising approximately five dwellings, but lies outside any defined settlement boundary within the adopted development plan. Whilst neighboured by residential development on two sides, the wider character of the area is rural, with open countryside extending beyond the immediate grouping of dwellings.”

“The site lies within the Yare Tributary Farmland with Parkland Landscape Character Area and is located directly opposite Pack Lane Meadow County Wildlife Site, a locally designated ecological site. Mature trees, hedgerows and vegetation within and around the site contribute to its verdant character and provide potential ecological connectivity with the adjacent wildlife site.”

“In addition, the proposal fails to demonstrate compliance with the Habitat Regulations. No completed GIRAMS Unilateral Undertaking has been secured, no nutrient neutrality assessment or mitigation has been provided, and insufficient ecological information has been submitted to enable the Local Planning Authority to determine the impact of the development on biodiversity interests, protected species and the nearby Pack Lane Meadow County Wildlife Site.”

“Having undertaken the balancing exercise required by Policy S5 of the NPPF, it is concluded that the benefits arising from the provision of a single self-build dwelling are substantially outweighed by the adverse impacts arising from the site's unsustainable location and the unresolved ecological and Habitat Regulations matters. Accordingly, the application is recommended for refusal.”

“One objection was received in respect of the application. The objector raises concerns that traffic levels on the surrounding narrow country lanes have increased in recent years, resulting in damage to road verges and edges, and considers that the proposal would add further traffic to the local highway network.”

“Further concerns relate to the construction phase of the development, including potential damage to Pack Lane from construction traffic, obstruction of the road during building works, and the impact of construction vehicles on neighbouring residents. The objector requests that, should planning permission be granted, conditions be imposed to control construction traffic movements, prevent…”

“Members voted 8 – 2 to delegate authority to the Assistant Director of Planning to approve subject to resolution of Nutrient Neutrality, GIRAMS and satisfactory submission of a preliminary ecological survey and conditions. (contrary to officers’ recommendation of refusal which was lost 2 – 8)”

“Reason for Overturn Members considered that the Council’s inability to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, together with the current shortfall in meeting self-build housing targets, outweighed the harms identified in Reason for Refusal one relating to the site's unsustainable countryside location. 3. Appl. No :”