Two three-bedroom bungalows at Northwick Marina, Land At Neweys Hill, Worcester

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought to retain two three-bedroom bungalows and their access after they were built differently from approved plans.

“This application seeks planning permission for the retention of the two bungalows constructed on the site and access thereto. Following the grant of planning permission in 2017 for the ‘erection of two no. three bedroom bungalows’, two dwellings were constructed between 2020 and 2021. Following investigations by Officers it was established that they had not been constructed fully in accordance with the approved plans.”

“Google Earth Satellite Image 3.3 The application is accompanied by a full set of plans together with a suite of supporting documents that include:”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site contains two curved, single-storey bungalows beside the River Severn, within a conservation area, locally designated green space and flood risk zones.

“The site and surrounding area 2.1 The application site is located off Neweys Hill, which is a private road accessed off Eastbank Drive, in the Claines Ward. The site is located adjacent to the northeastern bank of the River Severn and comprises two bungalow properties, with an additional ‘floating’ dwelling to the northwest.”

“The properties have living roofs and are an irregular curved shape; the adjacent floating house is oval shaped and sits on Northwick Marina. The properties benefit from balcony terraces to their rear elevations along with landscaping provided around the site. The site is located within the Riverside Conservation Area, within an area of locally designated Green Space and it is also within Flood Zones 2 and 3.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and changes

Permission for two bungalows was granted in 2017, but the built homes were positioned further northwest; a later amendment application was refused.

“Planning History 5.1 The wider site has been the subject of the following planning applications: P08E0649 - Refurbishment and improvement of Northwick Marina. Approval. September 2009 P16E0456 - Installation of a residential mooring. Approval. November 2016. P17E0114 - Erection of a single storey, three bedroomed floating house. Approval. November 2017. Main relevant planning applications: P17E0112 - Erection of two, three-bedroom bungalows. Approval.”

“23/00961/NMA - Application for a non-material amendment to planning approval P17E0112. Amendment relates to the position of the dwellings. Refusal. March 2024. The most recent application (28 th November 2023) was for a non-material amendment (NMA), under section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). The application sought regularisation of retrospective amendments to the approved siting of the dwellings approved under planning approval P17E0112.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the development improves a former boatyard, enhances the conservation area, provides housing and avoids significant harm despite green space policy tension.

“All comments received as part of the consultation and notification procedures have been taken into account. The application site is located on locally designated Green Space, and therefore consideration of SWDP 38 has been undertaken.”

“As outlined through this report, there is some policy tension with policy SWDP 38, because the development is located within an area of ‘green space’. When attributing weight to this tension with policy, it is noteworthy that planning permission has previously been granted for two dwellings in this location, with the difference in relation to green space impact being their precise siting.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

About 104 objections raised concerns including the road, flooding, riverbank erosion, land stability, green space and the closed footpath, while key consultees raised no objection.

“Consultations 6.1 Formal consultation, including display of site notices, has been undertaken in respect of the application. The following comments from statutory and non-statutory consultees and interested third parties have been received in relation to the original and amended proposals and are summarised as follows: Neighbours and other third-party comments: A total of approximately 104 objections, 5 comments of support and 17 general comments have been received…”

“The concerns relate to the following: - Access and damage to the road surface during construction. - Concerns that the proposals relate to two new dwellings. - Impact of the development on the erosion of the riverside footpath and banking underneath the properties. - Request for compensation to reinstate the footpath or redivert. - Concern with regards to safety of occupants of the properties given the sites location adjacent to the river.”

Officer report

What people said

An objector and local ward members argued that the development contributed to the riverbank collapse and should fund or secure footpath restoration.

“She concluded with just three points with a reminder of the duties that the Government has laid out for planning authorities to help ensure that development does not occur in unstable locations or without appropriate precautions and minimize the risks and effects of land instability on property infrastructure and the public, bring unstable land wherever possible back into productive use.”

“The objector spoke and informed Committee Members that she created the Change.Org online petition which has generated 1,215 independent signatures and 50 comments. The petition specifically refers to the retrospective planning application and asks for the City Council to ensure the re-establishment of the public footpath at Northwick Marina.”

Minutes

Who spoke

Two local ward members, an objector, the agent and the applicant addressed the committee.

What members debated

Members questioned the footpath, bank stability, drainage, the difference from the approved siting and the consequences of refusal.

“In referring to the Officers presentation, Members asked for clarification what the exact differences were between planning permission as given and what has been built. The Senior Planning Officer stated the difference between the previously approved application and this application is around 8 metres. The same number of dwellings and the same design but in a slightly different siting.”

“Members asked if there was a 2017 map showing the erosion of the river on a wider scale. It was commented that whatever caused it has led to the disappearance of a footpath. The Service Manager in response stated that there was no definitive map in terms of the exact spots of erosion.”

Minutes

The vote

Members voted six in favour, two against and none abstaining on delegated approval.

“After listening carefully and having taken on board all of the comments made and seeing no reason for a refusal a proposal to recommend approval as per the Officer’s report was made.”

“The Service Manager at this stage clarified the recommendation that had been moved which was for delegated authority to grant planning permission, subject to the signing of the Section 106 draft Heads of Terms as outlined in the Late Paper and the conditions as set out within section 9 of the report. This was seconded.”

Minutes