Agenda item

Planning Application No. SL/2019/0405 - Land between Morningside and Beech Cottage, Tanpits Lane, Burton in Kendal

To determine an application for outline planning permission for a single dwelling.

Minutes:

Self-build single dwelling at Land between Morningside and Beech Cottage, Tanpits Lane, Burton in Kendal (Mr and Mrs J Morphet)

 

The Interim Development Management Team Leader presented Planning Application No.SL/2019/0405 which sought outline planning permission for a detached dwelling on the edge of Burton in Kendal. He displayed plans and photographs which outlined the proposals and referred to the site visit. He informed Members that the site was in the open countryside and sat outside the development boundary and was therefore contrary to Policy LA1.1 of the Land Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD). The Interim Development Management Team Leader informed Members that the proposal was for a self-build dwelling which was not located within a settlement and was not affordable and was therefore contrary to the Council’s Development Management Policies DM12 and DM14. In addition, the proposed long access onto Station Road would be harmful to the rural character of the area with the loss of pastureland and the hedgerow on the site boundary.

 

James Morphet, the applicant, addressed the Planning Committee. He informed Members that he and his wife had lived in the area for twenty years and had two children who both attended school locally. Mr Morphet highlighted safety concerns in relation to speeding traffic through the village, which impacted on his children walking into the village to play with friends and also to the local bus stop to catch the bus to school. He expressed strong emotion in informing the Committee of the community and charity work that he and his wife had undertaken within the local community and beyond. Mr Morphet informed the Committee that his current home was a bungalow which his family had outgrown in recent years and highlighted his desire to extend the bungalow or to buy a larger family home, but explained that these options were no longer feasible. He also suggested that it may be inappropriate to extend the bungalow as true bungalows were in short supply in the local area and could suit a retired couple or a family wishing to downsize. In conclusion, Mr Morphet informed Members that the plot of land had been within the current land boundary and that he believed that it would provide his family with the opportunity to build a larger, more affordable and efficient family home with safer access into the village.

 

Kate Bellwood, the applicant’s agent, addressed the Planning Committee. She began by stressing that the application was what the self-build policy aimed to support and explained that the policy did not require the site to be infill or rounding off. She outlined the siting of the proposed dwelling and stated that it would not result in the loss of views to the countryside or extend into the countryside more than existing housing and it would not lead to further development. Ms Bellwood informed Members that on three occasions pre-application advice had indicated that the principle of housing was acceptable. Ms Bellwood acknowledged that the site was outside of existing settlement boundaries and stated that this was irrelevant under the self-build policy, as the policy required sites to be within the settlement with no mention of boundary lines, which underlined her opinion that the site felt like part of the village despite the boundary. Ms Bellwood went on to highlight previous applications where the Planning Committee had supported local people building their own homes. She informed Members that the field in question had been considered for allocation but had been discounted due to more suitable sites in the area. Ms Bellwood informed Members that the access track had pedestrian rights onto the lane and that the new access route would only serve the field and house. She informed Members that any hedgerows lost would be replaced and highlighted that the applicants were willing to consider allowing public access down the track to provide safer access between the village and Station Road. In concluding her address, Ms Bellwood reiterated that the site sat on the edge of a large village, flanked by existing properties and that the proposed development was supported by the self-build policy and she highlighted that approving the application would allow a local family to stay within the community and that there had been no objections from locals, including the Parish Council.

 

The Interim Development Management Team Leader responded to points raised during public participation. He informed Members that the key issue was the principle of the development, which was contrary to policies adopted in the Local Development Plan Document, and he reiterated that the site was outside the defined settlement boundary for Burton in Kendal and went on to outline details of Policy DM12 regarding locations considered appropriate, in principle, for a self-build property.

 

The Interim Development Management Team Leader responded to questions raised by Members. He outlined the settlement boundary and advised that the Land Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) sought to provide growth within the village boundary and on three allocated sites, which would provide 140 dwellings to meet the need with 35% of the homes being affordable.

 

Members thanked Officers for the well written report and gave consideration to the settlement boundary, self-build policy criteria DM12 and the risk of setting a precedent for further development.

 

RESOLVED – That Planning Application SL/2019/0405 be refused for the following reasons:

 

Reason (1)      The proposed development is located outside the settlement boundary for Burton in Kendal and is therefore contrary to Policy LA1.1 of the Land Allocations Development Plan Document, the purpose of which is to ensure that new homes are delivered in sustainable locations and to protect the character of the surrounding landscape.  The proposal will therefore not be in a sustainable location and will be harmful to the character of the surrounding landscape.

 

Reason (2)      The proposed long access road and new access point onto Station Road will be harmful to the rural landscape of the area and therefore be contrary to Policy DM2 of the Development Management Policies Development Plan Document.

Supporting documents: