Agenda item

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning).

Report of the Assistant Director (Planning) on the erection of replacement dwelling and cartlodge following demolition of all buildings / structures on site.

This application was presented to the Development Management Committee because North Mymms Parish Council have submitted a major objection.

This application seeks full planning permission for the erection of a two- storey dwelling following demolition of all buildings and structures on site. In addition to the dwelling, a four-bay cartlodge would be erected containing additional store.

The application site lies to the northwest of Dixons Hill Road and Dixons Hill Close and is accessed via a long track on the eastern corner. The site slopes towards the east and is rectangular in shape, measuring approximately 0.75 hectares.

The site lies within an area designated as countryside and is within the Mimmshall Valley Landscape Character Area and the Metropolitan Green Belt.

To the southeast of the site is a Grade II listed building, 47 Dixons Hill Close (list entry no. 1348174). Dating to the late eighteenth century, this is a two-storey red brick house with a hipped plain tile roof, end chimney stacks and a weatherboarded lean-to on the north eastern elevation.

The application site is surrounded by mature dense trees and currently contains a dwelling and a number of farm outbuildings all of which are in a poor state and negatively impact on the visual appearance of the area.

The application site has an established residential use and extant permission for a replacement single storey dwelling approved on 22 August 2017 under ref: S6/2014/2586/MA. The replacement single storey dwelling has commenced on site and therefore would be considered as the fall-back position.

Although the proposed dwelling would have an increase in height compared to any of the structures on site, there would be a substantial reduction in footprint, floor area and volume on site. The proposal is not considered to be materially larger than the dwelling and outbuildings it replaces. Therefore, the proposal would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the existing development and would meet the criteria (g) set out in NPPF paragraph 149.  The proposal would therefore constitute appropriate development in the Green Belt in accordance with local and national policies.

Subject to planning conditions and legal agreement, the proposal would represent an appropriate form of development within the Green Belt, be of good quality design, would not harm the rural character of the area. The proposed dwelling would be located some distance from adjoining premises, and would provide sufficient on-site parking and cycle storage. As such, complies with local and national policies and is recommended for approval.

Tom Stebbing, Agent, spoke regarding the application.

The architect’s brief was to propose a more beautiful, more sustainable dwelling that enhances the character of the landscape in which it sits. We were very conscious of the location in the greenbelt were grateful for the opportunity of using the Council's pre-app service before submitting this application. We have taken references from the local area, including the listed building nearby although that cannot be seen from the site. 

Councillor Jacqui Boulton, Parish Council, spoke against the application.

She stated that whilst the site is partly developed it is a Greenbelt area and no special circumstances have been made to outweigh the hard to the openness of the area this would cause as the scale of the proposal is too much. The new structure would be 2.5m taller than any existing building on the site, the visual impact of the bulk and design will be more prominent.

Whilst the proposal would turn an agricultural site into a residential property surrounded by fields, which may be tidier, this would contravene article 4 of the district plan as the bulk and design would be more obvious in the landscape. Reuse of a site like this may be good but not if it rides roughshod over the purposes and rules of Greenbelt. The proposal is too large and therefore overdevelopment which will affect the openness of the Greenbelt and it should be refused.

Members discussed the application, with officers clarifying various points where required.

It was clarified that there are no plans to remove existing trees, with the second recommended condition requiring protection of the trees on the site.

The 2017 consent for a dwelling in a different location on the site was implemented with trenches having been started on site. As the two cannot both be implemented, if this application is granted it would overrule the previous consent.

The case officer advised the committee of a change to the recommendation, which would require the applicant to enter into a legal agreement to ensure that the previously consented dwelling, located elsewhere on the site, could not be implemented alongside this new permission

Officers clarified that they understood the access road is owned and maintained by the applicant.

It was commented that whilst a bigger proposal than in 2017, this application is for a sensible house in a sensible location, on balance making good use of the land. It was noted that the local villagers have not put in objections.

Following discussion, it was proposed by Councillor A. Hellyer and seconded by Councillor J. Broach to approve the application.

            RESOLVED:

            (9 in favour, 4 against)

That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report and subject to the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement as outlined above