Five new dwellings at The Homestead, Lower Broadheath, Worcester

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing existing buildings, constructing five dwellings, altering the existing access and providing a new access to Heathmere.

“Application Number M/25/02031/FUL Site Address The Homestead, Crown East Lane, Lower Broadheath, Worcester, WR2 6RH Description of Development Demolition of existing buildings, construction of five dwellings and associated works, including alterations to existing vehicular access and provision of new vehicular access to the property ‘Heathmere’.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 0.62-hectare site contains a dwelling and outbuilding behind roadside properties, extending into agricultural land beside residential development and countryside.

“The Site is set back from the roadside behind other roadside properties and extends into the adjacent agricultural land. The Site area is approximately 0.62ha and comprises a dwelling with outbuilding located centrally on the site, accessed via a shared private drive off Crown East Lane.”

“The land is generally level. To the southern boundary there are several plots arranged in a clustered layout representing in part a more historical layout and character. To the east the encroaching countryside and to the north residential.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier applications included a permission in principle for up to four dwellings, which was allowed on appeal, and later advice on five dwellings.

“M/23/00693/PIP Permission in Principle for up to 4 dwellings - comprising sub-division of existing property into 2 dwellings, convert & extend existing garage to 1 no. dwelling and erection of 2 new self-build dwellings. The Homestead, WR2 6RH. REF. Oct 20 2023. Appeal Allowed 24 Apr 2024.”

“The proposals followed on from the Permission in Principle that was allowed on Appeal. Pre-application was sought with Planning Officers and a response was issued that in summary suggested:”

Officer report

Main planning considerations

The proposal was considered compatible with the local landscape and farmstead character, residential amenity and highway requirements, with mitigation required for protected species and biodiversity.

“Policy SWDPR 29 (Biodiversity and Geodiversity) seeks to protect wider biodiversity. Where a proposed development is likely to affect species protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulation 1994, or the Badgers Act 1992, an up-to-date protected Species Survey and Assessment should be submitted with the application.”

“When considering a planning application where protected species have been identified there is a need for planning authorities to take specific account of the Habitats Regulations, and in particular the 3 tests for European Protected Species. If these tests cannot be met the Local Planning Authority should refuse an application, or risk any permission being considered unlawful.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council sought refusal, highways raised no objection subject to conditions, the landscape officer continued to object on design grounds, and ecology raised no objection.

“No objection subject to conditions. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan and additional information that suitably addresses the comments raised within our earlier deferral.”

“While I continue to object to the proposal because of design issues, were you minded to grant planning permission, I would suggest conditions to include a site meeting between applicant, contractor and council’s landscape officer, and prior to commencement of development an arboricultural method statement shall be provided.”

Officer report

Residents’ views

Three responses raised concerns about openness, neighbour amenity, the scale and height of two plots, a tree and drainage; one response supported the scheme.

“Following Neighbour Notification four responses have been received. Of these three raise concerns and one seeks to support.”

“Impact on the Significant Gap / openness, • Impact on neighbour amenity. • Scale and height of Plots 2 and 3: overdominance and visual harm. • Impact on Weeping willow…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The case officer presented the application; the applicant’s agent and representative spoke in support, while no parish council representative or objector spoke.

Members considered the application

Five councillors spoke to the item before a motion to approve in line with the officer recommendation was proposed and seconded.

“Councillors J Michael, D Godwin, K Wells, T Wells, and D Clarke spoke to the item.”

“A motion to APPROVE planning permission, in line with officer recommendation, was proposed by Councillor D Godwin, seconded by Councillor J Michael and unanimously…”

Minutes