Retrospective garden outbuilding at Briar Cottage, Brook, Godalming

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for a detached single-storey outbuilding and decking for games, office, lounge and leisure use.

“Retrospective permission is sought for the erection of a detached single storey outbuilding with associated decking area that is incidental to the use of the dwelling known as Briar Cottage.”

“The outbuilding is for ancillary use and can be used as a games room/home office/additional lounge and leisure space, measuring approximately 6.7m in length x 6.1m in width x 4.1m in height, featuring a low pitch roof, rooflight, doors and windows.”

Officer report

The site

The semi-detached dwelling has a long landscaped rear garden, with the outbuilding at its southeastern corner in a semi-rural setting.

“The application site is located to the south side of Bowlhead Green Road, Godalming. The property is a semi-detached two storey dwelling featuring a long and landscaped rear curtilage stretching to the south. It is part of a row of properties situated towards the south of Bowlhead Green Road with woodland and open fields surrounding the application site.”

“The summerhouse outbuilding lies at the southeastern corner of the garden. The character of the surrounding area is semi-rural, there is a watercourse adjacent to the application site. Site levels show the ground to be relatively flat.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier applications for extensions were refused in 2014, then granted in 2014 and 2017.

“Reference Proposal Decision WA/2014/0238 Erection of extensions following demolition of existing conservatory. REFUSE 03/04/2014”

“WA/2014/0758 Erection of extensions following demolition of existing conservatory (revision of WA/2014/0238). GRANT 03/06/2014”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while the Surrey Hills officer supported the proposal and council tree and landscape officers raised no objection.

“Witley and Milford Parish Council Object – not satisfied that the proposal meets the test for Very Special Circumstances (VSC) under Green Belt Policy DM14. The outbuilding is not in character with the surrounding properties and considers the provision of a unit capable of separate occupation to be overdevelopment.”

“Surrey Hills AONB Officer Support – does not consider that the outbuilding has any implications for the Surrey Hills National Landscape (AONB).”

Officer report

Objections from residents

Thirteen households objected over the covenant, overdevelopment, Green Belt impact, residential amenity, possible separate occupation, ecology, drainage, trees and parking.

“The proposal contravenes an existing restricted covenant, dated 12/10/1907, stating no additional development is to be permitted where it can be adapted or intended to be used as a dwelling. • The outbuilding represents overdevelopment of the site and wider area. • The outbuilding is disproportionate and conflicts with Green Belt policy in relation to the 40% rule. • Concerns regarding overbearing, loss of light and loss of privacy.”

“Concerns regarding impact on road infrastructure. The development would allow for increased parking requirement due to the potential increase in occupiers in the outbuilding.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector, a supporter and the ward councillor made representations under the public speaking scheme.

The committee debate

The committee debated the application and an alternative refusal resolution was proposed and seconded.

“Following debate, the committee voted against the officers recommendation to grant permission 3 in favour, no abstentions and 5 against.”

“An alternative resolution to refuse was proposed by Councillor Clark and was seconded by Cllr Cockburn for the reasons set out below.”

Minutes

The votes

The committee first voted against approval, then supported the alternative refusal by five votes to three.

“The committee voted on the revised proposal 5 in favour, no abstentions and 3 against…”

Minutes

The final decision

Planning permission was refused because the outbuilding’s size and scale were considered out of character and no very special circumstances had been demonstrated.

“3 RESOLVED that planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:”

“The retention of the ancillary outbuilding due to its size and scale would be out of character with the area and no every special circumstances have been demonstrated for its need. The development is therefore contrary to Policies DM4 and DM 14 of the Local Plan.”

Minutes