Land South Of Back Lane Ryhall Rutland Data via plota.co.uk

2026/0028/FUL - Full Application Approved

Proposal

Erection of one detached dwelling. Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

✓
Received
9 Jan 2026
✓
Consultation
14 Jan 2026
✓
Approved
28 May 2026

Approved on 28 May 2026 · Delegated Chairman Decision · Last checked 1 Aug 2026

Documents 22

Consultation & comments 9

PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 5 Mar 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 23 Feb 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 6 Feb 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 5 Feb 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 3 Feb 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 2 Feb 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 2 Feb 2026 View ↗
PDF Commenter’s name hidden Show Representations · 14 Jan 2026 View ↗
PDF NOTIFIED NEIGHBOUR LIST Notified Neighbour List · 14 Jan 2026 View ↗

All documents on the council site ↗

Associated applications 2

Site constraints 8

Public byway open to all traffic about 5 m away
Matters where it crosses or adjoins the site: obstructing a path without a diversion order is an offence, and work cannot start until the order is confirmed.
Compiled from highway authority data, not the legal definitive map. A few authorities have not published, so no path shown is not proof there is none.
National infrastructure project about 607 m away: Mallard Pass Solar Project
The site is about 607 m from the project boundary. Generating station, decided. The project page says whether consent was granted.
Nationally significant infrastructure projects (power stations, electricity lines, pipelines, major roads and railways, harbours, airports and reservoirs) are consented by a Secretary of State under the Planning Act 2008, after an examination by the Planning Inspectorate, rather than by the council. The boundary is the one the Inspectorate consults on and can change as the scheme does. Projects are shown within 2 km of the site.
Planning Inspectorate project page ↗
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 2
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Radon affected area, class 5
An estimated 10 to 30% of homes reach the radon action level. Indicative for the 1 km square, which takes the highest class found in it; a radon test gives the answer for a building.
From the British Geological Survey and UK Health Security Agency indicative atlas. Under building regulations, as the BRE guide BR 211 (2023) sets out, new buildings and extensions need basic radon protection from class 3 in England and Wales and from class 2 in Scotland, and full protection from class 5. The class at the site itself, from the detailed BGS map, decides which.
UKHSA radon ↗
Conservation area about 1 m away: Ryhall
The edge of the area; work outside it can still affect its setting.
The council must give weight to preserving or enhancing the area's character and appearance. Not every council has published its boundaries as open data.
Council document ↗
Also on the record
2 listed buildings within 150 m of the postcode pin; Inside the Ryhall built-up area; Natural England's Provisional ALC map (1:250,000, 1970s) had this area as grade 3, but it predates the buildings here and the current map does not class it as farmland.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt · No scheduled monument at the site

Checked on 6 October 2026. The pin for this application is the centre of its postcode rather than the building, so distances to nearby designations are measured from the postcode and can be out by the width of the postcode area. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England, the Planning Inspectorate, the British Geological Survey and UK Health Security Agency (radon, contains BGS materials © UKRI) and council datasets, Open Government Licence. A boundary can run through a site and the council holds the definitive record: confirm with the council before relying on this.

Work with planning data?

Every application in Rutland - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Council
Rutland
Application type
Full Application
Received
9 Jan 2026
Validated
9 Jan 2026
Ward
Ryhall And Casterton Ward
Parish
Ryhall Parish Council
Case officer
Show
Target decision
6 Mar 2026
Decision
Approve
Decision date
28 May 2026
Decision level
Delegated Chairman Decision
Applicant
Show
Agent
Harris McCormack Architects

How this decision compares

Decided in 139 days from validation, 83 days slower than Rutland's median of 56 for full applications. Approved, as 85% of full applications here are.

73%decided within 8 weeks
85%approved
201decided in the last year

Plota live figures for full applications decided by Rutland in the last twelve months, from validation. Rutland decision record →

Public comments

No public comments yet.

47 neighbours consulted · Last counted 1 Aug 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Alt. reference
PP-14612212
Planning Portal ref
PP-14612212
Consultation
14 Jan 2026
Comments by
12 Feb 2026
Site or press notice
15 Jan 2026
Statutory expiry
6 Mar 2026
Env. assessment
No
Rutland
Planning Authority Score
6.2/10
Average
#93 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

Rutland is faster than most councils at deciding householder applications, ranking #87 out of 296. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (92%) than the national average (90%).

Faster than most councils
for householder decisions
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Rutland decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
89%
Overall approval rate
Above avg (87%) #142 of 296
92%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #164 of 296
74%
Decided in 8 weeks
Above avg (63%) #87 of 296
34%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #91 of 296
65%
Minor dwellings approved
43 decided (1-9 homes)
87%
Major dwellings approved
15 decided (10+ homes)
83%
Change of use approved
24 decided
520
Total decisions
57 refused in the year to March 2026