Five new dwellings at 68 Westholme Road, Bidford-on-Avon, Alcester

What was proposed

The application proposed alterations to No. 68, demolition of rear buildings, five dwellings and changes to the vehicular access.

“Application Ref. 26/00032/FUL Site Address: Westholme Road, Bidford-on-Avon, Alcester B50 4AN Description of Development: Demolition of conservatory, various alterations to No 68 Westholme Road. Demolition of buildings to rear of No 68 and erection of 5 dwellings. Alterations to vehicular access onto Westholme Road. All associated works.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An earlier application for a bungalow was refused in 1989.

“Proposal Decision and date 89/00293/FUL Land and building - erection of one bungalow. Refused 01.08.1989”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended permission because the housing benefits outweighed limited visual and bin-carry harms, while conditions addressed access, ecology and construction.

“I consider that there are elements of the scheme’s layout which are not high quality and result in minor visual harms and would not fully comply with Policies CS.5 and CS.9 of the Core Strategy and NDP Policies ENV9 and H5. However, given the extent of the adverse impacts (for these reasons set out above), these conflicts carry no more than limited weight. The failure to comply with the SPD requirements for bin carry distances is also afforded limited adverse weight.”

“Furthermore, the provision of 2 and 3 bedroom bungalows to meet a parish need as identified in the Housing Need Survey is afforded moderate positive weight. Given the scale of development I also afford the measures detailed in the climate change checklist limited positive weight. The economic benefits through construction and occupation of the dwellings are afforded limited positive weight.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Ecology, highways, public rights of way, environmental health and Severn Trent raised no objection subject to conditions or a note; CPRE objected.

“Warwickshire County Council Ecology (WCC Ecology):”

“Comment: No objection subject to note Date: 09/07/2026”

Officer report

Who spoke

The parish council clerk spoke against the proposal, while the agent, applicant and planning consultant answered questions; the ward member also addressed the committee.

The committee vote

A motion to grant permission was proposed and seconded, then passed by seven votes to two.

“Having considered the application and the representations made at the meeting, a Motion of GRANT, in accordance with the recommendation detailed in the report, was proposed by Councillor Adam and seconded by Councillor Jones.”

“Thereafter, by 7 votes in favour, to 2 votes against, it was…”

Minutes

The decision

The committee granted permission with the sixteen conditions and four notes listed in the report, with detailed wording delegated to officers.

“That Planning Application 26/00032/FUL be GRANTED subject to the following (the detailed wording of which be delegated to Officers):”

“16 conditions contained in the report; and • 4 notes contained in the report.”

Minutes