One detached dwelling at Land Rear Of The Hollies, Lower Road, Staple

“25/01240 - Erection of dwellinghouse, detached garage and associated works (2 mobile homes and outbuildings to be removed) (self-build) - Land Rear of The Hollies, Lower Road, Staple Reason for report - Number of contrary views (27 and Parish Council) b) Summary of Recommendation…”

“In light of the above, it is considered that the application site is in an unsustainable location and new dwellings in this location would undermine the sustainability objectives of the NPPF and policy SP4. It is not considered that the proposal would meet the exceptional criteria of policy SP4 of dwellings located within the open countryside.”

“Whilst the form of the dwelling with a pitched roof and half hipped detailing is traditional per se, it is considered that the dwelling and garage would have a footprint and subsequent scale and massing which would also be at odds with the locality and coupled with its backland location would not be subservient to the street fronting development.”

“Impact on Residential Amenity 2.14 The NPPF requires development to achieve a high standard of amenity for current and future residents. Existing residents 2.15 Given the separation distance, it is not considered that the proposed development would not have a harmful impact upon the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with regards to overbearing, overshadowing, overlooking, loss of privacy, loss of light or sense of enclosure.”

“KCC Ecology- No objection subject to conditions re. Biodiversity enhancement plan and breeding birds informative…”

“Southern Water- requests formal notification of any proposed demolition works prior to such works being undertaken.”

“Since the report had been published, a letter had been submitted claiming that the dwelling would accommodate a rural worker. The Principal Planner advised that the proposal had not been submitted as a rural worker application, nor had a certificate of lawful use been applied for. There were also concerns about the scale of the proposed dwelling.”

“In response to Councillor Nee, the Principal Planning Solicitor reminded Members that there was a process to be followed to establish whether there was a lawful use of the site, and it was premature to assume what the outcome of that process would be. He stressed that the Committee was required to make decisions in accordance with the Local Plan and the application did not accord with the Local Plan.”

“(i) The site is located within open countryside, outside the confines of any defined settlement. The scheme would result in the encroachment of built development into open countryside, causing a harmful urbanising effect on the rural area and constituting an unsustainable form of development. The benefits arising from an additional dwelling would not outweigh the harm identified.”

“(iv) In the absence of a Section 106 legal agreement to secure the necessary provisions to meet the self-build definition in the Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015, the application has not demonstrated that it is exempt from providing Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) on site and has therefore failed to mitigate for any potential BNG requirements under the provisions of Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (inserted by The Environment Act 2021), contrary…”