New driveway access at Uplands, Box End Road, Kempston, Bedford

“The proposal seeks permission for the creation of a new vehicular access to serve the existing dwelling known as Uplands. During the course of the application, the description of development was amended to clarify that the proposal comprises both a new vehicular access onto Box End Road and a driveway serving Uplands (also owned by the applicant).”

“- 41 - Uplands currently shares a vehicular access with the neighbouring property, The Gatehouse. The proposed development would provide Uplands with its own independent access, thereby allowing each property to have separate means of access. The applicant states that, in the longer term, this would improve security and reduce the impact of the shared access arrangement on the amenity of the occupiers of The Gatehouse.”

“The application site is located to the western side of Box End Road. To the northwest is the Uplands and to the north is The Gatehouse. On the opposite side of the road, to the northeast is 'Lodge to Crossland Fosse', which is a grade II listed building.”

“The proposed access and driveway layout in the current application is substantially the same as that approved under the following permissions:”

“- 42 - The most recent planning application at the site, 23/00629/OUT, sought outline planning permission (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of two dwellings. That application proposed an access located slightly further south than the access proposed in the current application, and the associated driveway was designed to serve the proposed dwellings rather than provide access to Uplands. Planning permission was refused, and the subsequent appeal (ref.”

“Having regard to the submitted evidence, the proposal is considered acceptable and would not result in unacceptable harm to the significance of heritage assets, highway safety, the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside, flood risk, ecology or trees.”

“Subject to the recommended planning conditions and informative, the development is considered acceptable in all other respects and is therefore recommended for approval.”

“Conservation Officer The proposal would preserve the significance of the listed Lodge. Kempston Rural Parish Council Objection. Highways (Development Control) Officer No objection subject to conditions. Arboricultural Officer - Planning No objection subject to conditions. Ecology Officer No objection subject to conditions.”

“-contradiction to relevant policies in the Local Plan regarding development in the open countryside -impact on the character of the site and the area, and fail to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside -highway safety -impact on trees -using this incremental development to support a later reapplication for a more signification development of the site -no identifiable community need -security concerns to nearby properties…”

“The Planning Officer provided the following updates:”

“The Council's Highways Officer had recommended a planning condition requiring swept path analysis for both a fire engine and a family car. However, following the Committee site visit, officers confirmed that sufficient existing turning space was available to the front of Uplands, connecting to the proposed access. Accordingly, it was not considered necessary to impose this condition.”

“That permission be granted in respect of the above application in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control.”