Exceptional quality dwelling at Land North Of Green End, Chadlington

What was proposed

The application proposed one exceptional-quality dwelling with a gatehouse, garage, office, landscape works, ponds, mounds and associated infrastructure.

“Proposed single dwelling (Paragraph 84e house), detached gatehouse, garage and office, landscape enhancements, SuDs/ephemeral ponds, landscaped mounds and associated works.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 0.49-hectare former limestone quarry lies southwest of Chadlington within the Cotswolds National Landscape and is reached by a private agricultural track.

“The application site comprises approximately 0.49 hectares of land forming a former limestone quarry, located approximately 1.4 kilometres south west of the village of Chadlington. The site is accessed via a private agricultural track off Green End Road.”

“The site lies within the Cotswolds National Landscape and within Flood Zone 1.”

Officer report

Earlier application and appeal

An earlier application was refused and its appeal dismissed, with the Inspector identifying a late pavilion design amendment as the sole failure.

“The submitted scheme reverts in full to the original design of the pavilion element, removing the mid determination amendment which the Inspector identified as the sole reason why the appeal scheme failed to meet the policy tests of Paragraph 84e.”

“The original design of the pavilion was architecturally outstanding and sensitive to landscape character • The appeal was dismissed solely due to a late amendment to the pavilion design introduced during determination, which weakened the clarity, geometry and landscape relationship of the building • But not for that amendment, the scheme would have met the requirements of Paragraph 84e…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the reinstated pavilion design met the exceptional-quality tests and the scheme would enhance its immediate landscape setting.

“The site is located within an isolated countryside location, in policy terms, where new residential development is acceptable only in the specific circumstances outlined by Policy H2, including proposals that demonstrate exceptional quality design consistent with the aims of paragraph 84e of the NPPF. The previous application on this site was considered in detail at appeal, with the Inspector’s findings carrying significant weight in this assessment.”

“Having considered the technical consultation responses, including design review advice and the reinstated architectural form, officers are satisfied that the extremely high bar set by Policy H2 and paragraph 84e has been achieved. The development is truly outstanding, reflects the highest standards of contemporary rural architecture, and represents a design that would help raise the standard of rural development more generally.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected, while highways raised no objection and drainage, ecology and contamination consultees supported the scheme subject to conditions.

“WODC Drainage No Objection subject to conditions…”

Officer report

Objections received

One objection cited landscape harm, visual effects, light pollution, impacts on wildlife and tranquillity, policy conflict and possible speculative development.

“One third-party objection has been received raising concern that the proposed development would not significantly enhance its immediate setting and would have a harmful impact on the landscape character of this previously uninhabited part of the valley. The objector states that the development would introduce negative visual effects alongside light pollution, which they consider detrimental to local wildlife and to the tranquillity and dark-sky qualities of the area.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent told Members that the design responded sympathetically to its landscape, used renewable technologies and met the national design test.

Members’ discussion

Members considered that the development would enhance its setting and respect the landscape, while stressing that lighting and biodiversity conditions must be enforced.

“In debating the application Members were of the opinion that approval should be granted on the basis that the development would enhance the immediate setting and was also sensitive to the local landscape. Other Members concurred with this view but highlighted that the conditions relating to lighting and biodiversity net gain should be made clear and enforced.”

Minutes

The vote

Approval was proposed, seconded and agreed by the Sub-Committee.

“Approval of the application was proposed by Cllr Goodwin and seconded by Cllr Beaney. This proposal was put to the vote and agreed by the Sub-Committee.”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved in line with officers’ recommendation, subject to signing a legal agreement for off-site biodiversity enhancements.

“RESOLVED: That subject to the signing of a section 106 legal agreement and in line with officers recommendations the application be approved.”

Minutes