Issue - meetings

RESOLVED: That application 24/02577/FPH be GRANTED planning permission subject to the following conditions:

‘Condition 1:

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Condition 2:

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out wholly in accordance with the details specified in the application and supporting approved documents and plans listed above.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with details which form the basis of this grant of permission.

Condition 3:

The outbuilding hereby permitted shall be built in external materials to match the existing dwellinghouse unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the visual amenities of the locality and to comply with Policies D1 and D2 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031.

Condition 4:

The outbuilding hereby permitted shall be used only for the purposes ancillary to the main dwellinghouse No. 4 Arch Road, Great Wymondley, Herts, SG4 7EP.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the locality and to comply with Policies D1 and D3 of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031.’

Audio Recording – 5 minutes 54 seconds 

N.B. Councillor Caroline McDonnell declared an interest as Member Advocate and moved to the public speaking gallery.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report of Application 24/02577/FPH supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The Chair invited the Member advocate Councillor Caroline McDonnell to speak in support of the application. Councillor McDonnell thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

·         The current application would have less impact on both greenbelt openness and neighbouring residents.

·         The increase on the original building is large but that the property is on a large plot approximately 0.25 acres. 

·         The original building covered 14% of the plot, whereas the proposal covered 38% of the plot.

·         A 6ft wall already existed at the site which prevented openness and the proposal would not affect openness further.

·         The permission for the site granted previously would have been more impactful to greenbelt openness than the current application.

·         Similar proposals had been recommended to the Committee and approved.

·         Offices are now key to new housing designs due to a change in work life.

·         Allowing the proposal to go ahead would allow a growing family to remain in the village.

The following Members asked for points of clarification:

·         Councillor Ruth Brown

In response to a point of clarification from Councillor Ruth Brown, Councillor McDonnell advised that the previous permitted plan would have been behind the existing building, rather than to the side.

The Chair thanked Councillor McDonnell for her contribution.

N.B. Councillor Caroline McDonnell left the Chamber for the remainder of the consideration of this Item.

The Chair invited the Applicant, Mr Shaun Doughty, to speak in support of this application. Mr Doughty thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including that:

·         He had lived at the dwelling since 2019 with his wife and they have since had 2 children.

·         The family were active members of the village and had a strong emotional attachment to the dwelling and surrounding area.

·         The planning application of 2016 was a contributory factor in them buying a property.

·         The purpose of the application was for a home office and an at home gym. 

·         He had consulted neighbours during the application process to ensure the proposed plan was not detrimental to them.

·         A previous proposal in 2023 was rejected and the officer gave recommendations which were considered in this application.

·         The proposed planned extension would not overlook neighbouring dwellings or impact the view from these properties.

·         The application is for an extension at the front rather than the agreed location to provide better security.

The following Members asked for points of clarification:

·         Councillor Martin Prescott

·         Councillor Val Bryant

In response to points of clarification, Mr Doughty advised that:

·         There were no objections raised by the Parish Council or neighbours.

·         The building materials are in line with the village aesthetic and the building that already exists at the dwelling.

The Chair thanked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 130