Agenda item

The following item will be considered at 11am:

1.  24/00360/FUL - Staddle Stones, 5 Saltford Court, Saltford

The Committee considered:

A report by the Head of Planning on the application under the site visit applications list.

RESOLVED that in accordance with the delegated powers, the applications be determined as set out in the main applications decisions list attached as Appendix 2 to these minutes.

(1)  24/00360/FUL - Staddle Stones, 5 Saltford Court, Saltford

The Planning Case Officer introduced the report which considered an application for the erection of a two-storey side extension, new front gable facade, first floor rear balcony and associated works. 

He confirmed the officers’ recommendation that permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The following public representations were received:

1.  Carol Cheung/Helen Mulholland objecting to the application.

2.  Chris Dance, agent, supporting the application.

Cllr Duncan Hounsell was in attendance as the local Member and raised the following points:

1.  The application should be refused as the extension was partially within the green belt, and changes to the green belt boundary should only be defined as part of the local plan process.

2.  There were no exceptional circumstances for the substantial increase of built form in the green belt.

He asked the Committee to refuse the application.

In response to Members’ questions, it was confirmed:

1.  There would be a loss of garden and mitigation planting was included as part of the scheme including 3 trees and a replacement hedge.

2.  The officer view was that the development did not need screening by further planting.

3.  Permitted development rights had been removed as a result of a previous application which meant that planning permission had to be sought for further developments.

4.  Officers did not consider the proposed scheme to be an overdevelopment of the plot.  The report addressed issues relating to the design, size, scale and siting of the development in the conservation area and officers concluded it to be acceptable.

5.  The green belt boundary was not changing but the building was extending into the green belt.  The percentage of the overall building in the green belt was 33%.

6.  As officers considered the development to be appropriate in principle the test about special circumstances was not triggered.  The Committee could make a different judgement about whether the development was a disproportionate addition in the green belt. 

Cllr Shaun Hughes expressed concern about the development encroaching the green belt boundary.

Cllr Eleanor Jackson concurred with this view and also stated that the design would not conserve and enhance the conservation area.

Cllr Paul Crossley stated that he considered the development to be disproportionate and inappropriate development in the green belt with no special circumstances as well as the scale and design being out of keeping with the local area.  He moved that the officer recommendation be overturned, and the application be refused.  This was seconded by Cllr Eleanor Jackson.

On being put to the vote the motion was CARRIED (9 in favour, 0 against - unanimous).

RESOLVED that the application be refused for the following reasons:

1.  Green Belt - the proposed extension represented a disproportionate addition to the original building and was therefore considered to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt. No very special circumstances existed to clearly outweigh the harm identified.

2.  Design and Heritage - the proposed development, due to its scale and design, would be out of keeping with the character of the surrounding area and would result in less than substantial harm to the Saltford Conservation Area. Public benefits do not exist to outweigh this harm.