Agenda item

Recommended for Refusal

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/17/0411/HH, planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in the report now submitted.

Officers summarised the application and explained that the eastern and southern boundaries of the site had been the subject of previous extensions.  The proposed development would increase the floor space of the dwelling by 17.5%.  Members were reminded that the main characteristic of the green belt was openness with an absence of built development.

Officers considered that there was no justification for permitting this development and the proposal would be visually disproportionate to the character of the property and was therefore inappropriate development.

Jackie Pepper addressed the Committee in support of the application.  Councillor I Devonshire addressed the Committee as the local ward Member in respect of the application.  Councillor J Goodeve commented on the slope of the land and how this contributed to the acceptability of the application.

Officers confirmed to Councillor M Allen that pre-application advice did not bind the Council to any decisions and this advice did not prejudice Members in determining applications.

Following a comment from Councillor M Casey, Officers confirmed the dimensions of the original house as well as the proposed increase to these figures.  Members were advised that the impact was more than just numbers and should be considered in terms of visual effect.

Following a number of other comments from Members regarding what volume of extension would be considered ‘proportinate’ Officers stated that an extension of up to 50% of the size of the original dwelling would normally be acceptable.  However reliance should not be place on % increases alone and it was also necessary to consider the visual impact of the proposal.  Whilst this scheme equated to an increase of 17.5%; it was the visual impact of this large extension at first floor level that was the concern.  Members were reminded that Green Belt policy was clear in that visual openness should be maintained.  The Legal Advisor reminded Members that any departure from policy would require clear reasons to be articulated as to why the Committee was going against policy.

Councillor D Andrews proposed and Councillor D Oldridge seconded, a motion that application 3/17/0411/HH be granted on the grounds that the loss of openness of the Green Belt was not significant and the increased massing of the building was not inappropriate in this location. 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/17/0411/HH, planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.        3 year time limit (1T12)

2.        Approved plans (2E10)

3.        Matching materials (2E13)

Informatives:

1.        Other legislation

2.        The attention of the applicant is drawn to condition 2 of this permission which includes the demolition of the barn as detailed in the description of the application and on the approved drawings.

Summary of Reasons for Decision

East Herts Council has considered the applicant's proposal in a positive and proactive manner with regard to the policies of the Development Plan; the National Planning Policy Framework and in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (as amended).  The balance of the considerations having regard to those policies is that permission should be granted.