Replacement self-build dwelling at Little Mesmear Treglines Lane, St Minver, Wadebridge

The site and surroundings

The site contains a traditional two-storey dwelling, access, parking and amenity space, with hedgerows, a stone wall, fields and nearby homes.

“The existing site includes the existing two storey dwelling, associated access, parking and turning areas and amenity space. The site is bounded by hedgerows to the north, south and west and a Cornish stone wall makes up the eastern boundary along the driveway. Agricultural fields border the site to the east, west and partially to the north with a residential dwelling also sitting to the north. Access is to the south east of the site onto the adjacent highway.”

“The proposed dwelling would be arranged in a ‘U’ shape with the main two-storey aspect of the dwelling sited to the north of the site, two single storey wings would extend on either side toward the south along with the garden space which would be predominantly contained within the ‘U’. The existing access to south of the site is proposed to be stopped up and existing driveway removed and incorporated within the meadow area to the south of the dwelling.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the replacement principle, design, access, ecology and neighbour impacts were acceptable, while public benefits outweighed heritage harm.

“The principle of the proposed development is acceptable, as the replacement of dwellings in the countryside is provided for by the development plan. This proposal would deliver clear economic, social and environmental public benefits, including inward investment in the site, construction phase employment, ecological enhancements, and the delivery of a modern, energy efficient family home. These benefits weigh in favour of approval.”

“Taking a balanced approach, whilst the proposal would result in harm to the non-designated asset, the significance of the asset is not of such a degree to outweigh the public benefits of the scheme. It is considered that the scheme is acceptable and, as such, it is recommended for approval subject to conditions. All other matters have been taken into account, including the comments of the Parish Council…”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The parish council objected over countryside encroachment, scale, design and heritage, while other comments supported the proposal’s setting, local materials and community benefits.

“This application has been advertised in accordance with the regulations by means of site notice. To date Comments both in support of and objecting to the proposal have been received. The main relevant planning considerations raised within those comments have been summarised below: Support: • Design and character - will sit comfortably in the setting • Scale - site is large enough to accommodate the dwelling comfortably • Use of local materials • Low impact on neighbour…”

Officer report

Who spoke at the meeting

An objector, a parish councillor and the applicant’s supporter spoke, while the electoral division member’s statement was read in her absence.

What members discussed

Members asked about nearby development, the withdrawn extension, land use, planning history, occupancy restrictions, self-build status and development boundaries before debating the proposal.

“Clarification on the character of the adjacent holiday development; Clarification that a previous application for an extension to the dwelling had been withdrawn following concerns raised regarding the size of the extension when viewed from the host property; Clarification on the proposed use of land for residential purposes; Clarification on the planning history on the site in chronological order; 5.”

“This was a finely balanced application that should be supported; The proposal would sit comfortably in the landscape, with minimal impact on landscape character; The proposal should be supported; There were no planning policies that could be used to justify refusal of the application.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor Moorcroft proposed approval, Councillor Long seconded it, and the committee unanimously approved the application.

“Arising from consideration of the report and debate it was moved by Councillor Moorcroft, seconded by Councillor Long, and unanimously, it was:-”

“RESOLVED that Application No. PA25/08826 be approved subject to the conditions contained within the report.”

Minutes

Approval conditions

Approval was subject to conditions covering commencement, approved plans, materials, ecology, the cloam oven, lighting, landscaping, energy, water efficiency and solar panels.

“Prior to the first occupation of the dwellinghouse hereby approved, a scheme of lighting shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting scheme shall include details of external lighting and any mitigation measures to limit internal light spill. The lighting scheme and any mitigation measure shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.”

“The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the energy and water efficiency measures and renewable energy provision detailed in the Energy Statement prepared by Achieve Green and dated 19 November 2025 and the details contained within approved drawing 1849/001 REV A received on the 28 January 2026. The agreed details shall be implemented with the construction of the dwelling and thereafter retained and maintained.”

Officer report