One custom-build dwelling at Colliery Farm, 36 The Moor, Coleorton

What was proposed

Outline permission was sought for one custom-build dwelling, with access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping reserved for later approval.

“Time limit for reserved matters submission 2. Reserved Matters to be approved (access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping) 3. Approved Plans 4. Details of levels to be submitted and approved as part of the reserved matters application 5. Self/custom build occupation restriction 6. Coal mining site investigations and implementation of remediation works 7. Verification of remediation works 8. Great Crested Newt Precautionary Working Method Statement 9.”

“MAIN REPORT 1. Proposals and Background This application seeks outline planning permission for the erection of one custom-build dwelling with all matters reserved. Therefore the access, layout, appearance, scale and landscaping would be subject to later reserved matter(s) applications should outline planning permission be granted.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is outside development limits, within the National Forest and a coal development high-risk area, with access from an existing track and a public right of way.

“The wider application site is known as Colliery Farm. The site is accessed via an existing unmade track taken from The Moor which is to the east. The track also forms the route of Public Right of Way (PROW) M65 which provides access to the countryside and wider Rights of Way network to the west of Coleorton. Ownership of the existing track is unknown, and the owner cannot be traced.”

“The application site is located outside of the Limits to Development as per the adopted North West Leicestershire Local Plan (2021). The site is also within the National Forest and a “Coal Development – High Risk Area”. A group of three candidate Local Wildlife Sites’ (CLWS) are located to the south of the site.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An earlier application for a dwelling with a garage, parking and access was withdrawn in May 2024.

“24/00406/FUL - Erection of dwelling with associated works including detached garage, parking and access – Withdrawn 02.05.2024”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended permission because the self-build need and other benefits outweighed limited countryside harm and conflict with the settlement strategy.

“Balanced against the harms, the provision of additional housing in an accessible location is afforded positive weight, and the need for self-build plots in the district is considered to be significant, with moderate weighting in favour of the proposal being given to the provision of one self-build plot.”

“In this case it is acknowledged that there would be conflict with the spatial strategy, however given the contribution of a dwelling to the significant unmet need for self-builds, along with the other benefits of the proposal listed above, it is considered that the adverse impact of allowing this development would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole, having particular regard…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while environmental protection raised no objection and other consultees supported permission subject to conditions or informatives.

“The following summary of representations is provided. All responses from statutory consultees and third parties are available to view in full on the Council’s website.”

“No Objections, subject to conditions and/or informatives, from:”

Officer report

Who spoke

A parish councillor and an objector opposed the proposal, while the agent supported residential development and the highway position.

Members’ discussion

Members described the decision as difficult, while noting the site was secluded and one dwelling would minimise disruption for nearby residents.

“A discussion about the application followed, with members noting the difficulty of the decision. Members commented that the plot of land being considered was secluded, and that it was one property, which would have minimised disruption for nearby residents.”

“The Principal Planning Officer addressed concerns that were raised by members over the shortfall in the number of self-build properties and their regulations.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The motion to permit the application was carried, with seven members voting for and five against.

“The application be permitted in accordance with the officer’s recommendations.”

“Chair’s initials Recorded Vote (Motion) Councillor Ray Morris For Councillor Dave Bigby For Councillor Morgan Burke For Councillor Rachel Canny Against Councillor David Everitt Against Councillor John Legrys For Councillor Peter Moult For Councillor Carol Sewell Against Councillor Jenny Simmons For Councillor Nigel Smith Against Councillor Michael Wyatt Against Carried…”

Minutes