Changes to 11 homes at River Gwash Trout Farm, Ryhall

What was proposed

The application sought changes to approved plans for 11 homes, including bungalow sizes, external designs, roofing materials, site levels and boundary hedges.

“06/06/2023 V1 Application: 2025/0051/FUL ITEM 1 Proposal: Section 73 to vary condition 2 of application 2023/0991/FUL due to changes in the external appearance of dwelling(except plot 6), increase in size of the bungalows on plots 4 and 11, change to roofing materials for plots for plots 4,7,8,9 and 10, changes to site levels across the centre of the site and replanting of the boundary hedge along the northwestern boundary of the site and along part of northeast boundary…”

“EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The application site is adjacent to the Planned Limits of Development for Ryhall and accommodates trout lakes. Following a re-evaluation of the business, the lakes are no longer needed, and the site requires an alternative use. Planning permission was granted for 11 dwellings under application reference No 2021/1268/FUL. Changes to the approved scheme were also approved under application reference No 2023/0991/FUL.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site formed part of a trout farm beside the River Gwash, with housing nearby, a highway, cemetery and sewage works around it.

“The site formed part of the larger River Gwash Trout Farm and accommodated a portal framed agricultural building of 140 square metres and 13 rectangular fishponds.”

“There is housing abutting the north-eastern boundary of the site, the highway runs along the eastern boundary with the cemetery and sewage works beyond, sporadic housing to the south and the River Gwash to the west.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Permission was granted for 11 homes in 2023, followed by approval of changes to dwelling types and later discharge of conditions.

“The current Section 73 application seeks to vary condition 2, changing the approved plans granted planning permission under reference No 2023/0991/FUL to increase the size of the bungalows on plots No.4 and No.11, to make minor changes the external design of dwellings (except on plot 6) and changes to roofing materials for plots for plots No.4,7,8,9 and 10. It also proposed to make minor changes to site levels affecting plots No.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10”

“Relevant Planning History 2021/1268/FUL - Residential Development of 11 no. Dwellings. - Approved 23/06/2023. 2023/0991/FUL Section 73 application to vary Condition No. 2 (Approved Plans) on Planning Permission ref: 2021/1268/FUL - Residential Development of 11 no. Dwellings. Amendments include the change of dwelling type on Plots 9 & 11 and adjustment on site of Plot 10.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered the changes minor and acceptable, with no undue harm to visual or residential amenity and acceptable highways, ecology and drainage effects.

“The ground level changes will not have significant impact on the character and appearance of the site when viewed from within or outside the site. Overall, no objection is raised on visual grounds, and the proposal complies with Policies CS19 and SP15. The changes are considered acceptable for the site and the surroundings Impact on the neighbouring properties 40.”

“In relation to the increased size of the bungalows on both plots No.4 and No.11 The proposals would result in a satisfactory level of amenity for future occupants. There would be no undue overlooking between the properties, sufficient separation distances would be achieved, and adequate private rear gardens would be provided. The changes to the scheme would not alter this position.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council raised concerns about Plot 4 and the hedge, while ecology, highways, drainage, archaeology, water and public protection consultees raised no objection or had no further comments.

“Comments received 4 th February 2025 Ryhall Parish Council Planning committee note the objection in relation to Plot 4 and concur with that objection. It is noted that condition 2 of the original planning consent as follows: 'No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of hard and soft landscaping works for the site, which shall include any proposed changes in ground levels and also…”

“The Lead Local Flood Authority has reviewed the submitted Section 73 application to vary Condition 2. The proposed changes relate primarily to house types, materials, and amendments to site levels. The LLFA notes that the previously approved surface water drainage strategy was based on infiltration and permeable paving, and no updated drainage strategy or detailed information has been provided to demonstrate any change to this approach.”

Officer report

Residents’ objections

Three local residents objected over Plot 4, loss of privacy and sunlight, hedgerow removal, the ecological buffer, and alleged breaches of environmental commitments.

“Below is a summary of the comments. Full details can be viewed on the Council’s website https://publicaccess.rutland.gov.uk/online-applications/ Objections have been received from 3 local residents on the following grounds 1. Design changes to the bungalow on Plot 4 resulting in Loss of privacy and outlook to existing adjacent properties in Gwash Meadows Loss of sunlight, overshadowing to existing adjacent properties in Gwash Meadows 2.”

“06/06/2023 V1 4. Breach of the Landscape Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) and S106 agreement. 5. Failure to protect the existing hedgerows and trees with protective fencing. 6. The developer stating that a local resident thinned/removed part of the hedgerow along the north-east boundary (i.e. along the side boundary of plot 4 and the rear garden boundaries of properties on Gwash Meadows.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Development Manager introduced the application and gave an executive summary recommending approval subject to conditions and a deed of variation.

Members’ discussion

Members asked about ecological buffer maintenance and heard that a management company would oversee it, with measures preventing private garden use.

“Members inquired about the maintenance of the ecological buffer strip, and it was clarified that a management company would be responsible, with measures in place to prevent the buffer from becoming part of private gardens.”

“Officers noted the need for revised wording to certain planning conditions due to recent updates, ensuring consistency across all related conditions as listed in the addendum.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Councillor A Brown proposed approval, it was seconded, and ten votes in favour carried the motion unanimously.

“It was proposed by Councillor A Brown and seconded that the application be approved subject to the conditions in the report and a dead of variation to the existing s106 agreement.”

“Upon being put to the vote, with ten votes in favour, the motion was unanimously carried.”

Minutes