Agenda item

The Committee considered an application for the erection of a new single storey dwelling house, within the grounds of Whitfield Court (a Grade II* listed building), following removal of existing builder's yard.

Councillor S Hussain, Ward Councillor, spoke in support of the application and commented that the new dwelling would be in the footprint of the builder’s yard. There have been no objections from neighbours regarding the greenbelt and you would not be able to see the new dwelling house from outside the curtilage. The current owners of Whitfield Court maintained the site well and Councillor S Hussain thought that putting the builder’s yard back into dwelling use would reduce vehicular movement on the site. He asked the Committee to seriously consider approval of this application.

The Planning Officer advised that they had considered whether very special circumstances exist in this situation and it was concluded that they did not. It was noted that there was vehicle movement within the builder’s yard, however it was considered that this would be at a very similar level with the new dwelling. Committee members were reminded that the current owner’s family situation carried no weight in planning consideration and that the members must not take this into account this when determining this application. Planning Officers advised that the bulk and mass of the dwelling house would be considerably more harmful to the green belt than the current fence.

Following a question the Planning Officer confirmed that a certificate of lawfulness had been submitted for the builder’s yard in 2020. This was retrospective, but the owners could demonstrate the yard had been operating for more than 10 years, which meant enforcement action could no longer be taken.

Some Councillors commented that it was subjective, however they thought that a dwelling would be preferable to a builder’s yard on the site.

Although comments had been made regarding the new dwelling house using the grounds of the current dwelling as amenity space, the Chairman reminded Members that the proposed dwelling house was not set within the red line of the current dwelling house. This meant that although the intention of the current owners was to occupy the property themselves, if the application was approved by the Committee there was nothing to stop the new dwelling house being sold. As it stood in the current application, the proposed dwelling had no amenity space provided.

The Chairman also commented that approving such an application could set a precedent which could open up more green belt development proposals which could be quite dangerous. Dan Freeland supported what the Chairman had said and reiterated that the view of the Planning Officer was that the very special circumstances had not been achieved to allow this development on the green belt.

It was once again stated by the Chairman that the amenity space of the neighbouring property could not be considered as part of this application. If the red line was round the whole Whitfield Court site, then this application could be considered as a ‘Granny Annex’, but in its current form it had to be considered as a completely separate dwelling house to that of Whitfield Court.

In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on refusal of the application.  The votes for and against refusal of the application were recorded as follows.

In favour:                           Cllrs D Hughes, L Morales (Chairman) and D Roberts.

                                 TOTAL:  3

Against:                              None

                                 TOTAL:  0

Present but not voting:      Cllrs J Brown, A Boote, S Dorsett, N Martin and C Rana.

                                 TOTAL:  5

The application was therefore refused.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be REFUSED.