Agenda item

Planning Application DC/20/1898/OUT - Plot 1, Landmark, Coltsfoot Green, Wickhambrook (Report No: DEV/WS/21/002)

Report No: DEV/WS/21/002


Outline planning application (means of access to be considered) - two dwellings


Outline planning application (means of access to be considered) - two dwellings


This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel.


Officers were recommending that the application be refused for the reasons set out in Paragraph 44 of Report No DEV/WS/21/002.


As part of her presentation the Officer provided videos of the site by way of a virtual ‘site visit’.


Speaker:      Jonny Rankin (agent) spoke in support of the application


During discussion reference was made to the ongoing West Suffolk Local Plan consultation and the Service Manager (Planning – Development) confirmed that the Wickhambrook community had engaged with the consultation process.


Councillor Roger Dicker proposed that the application be refused, as per the Officer recommendation.  This was duly seconded by Councillor Jim Thorndyke.


Upon being put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was resolved that




Planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:


1.   The 2019 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) provides that the planning system should recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling and focus development in sustainable locations. Local Planning Authorities should avoid new homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. Policies CS1 and CS4 between them establish the spatial strategy and the settlement hierarchy for development within the area, whilst policy CS13 reinforces this position and provides that development which is proposed outside of the settlement boundaries identified through policy CS4 will be strictly controlled. Both of these policies seek to resist residential development outside of settlement boundaries. Furthermore, Policy DM5 (Development within the Countryside) states that areas designated as countryside will be protected from unsustainable development and Policy DM27 sets out the strict circumstances where dwellings will be permitted outside of settlement boundaries. The site falls outside of any designated settlement boundaries, showing two detached dwellings. The plots do not front a highway or form an infill within a continuous built up frontage. The proposal does not therefore meet the provisions of any of these policies and there are no material considerations that outweigh this very significant conflict with the Development Plan.


2.   Policies DM2 and DM22 of the Development Management Policies Document and the National Planning Policy Framework attach great importance to good design, expecting new developments to be visually attractive, respond to local character and reinforce local distinctiveness whilst Policy CS4 seeks to ensure that development proposals do not adversely affect the setting of a settlement. Owing to its location on the periphery of the hamlet of Coltsfoot Green, which does not benefit from being within a settlement boundary, the character of the area is rural in nature, with open countryside to the south and west of the application site. Residential development on the site would therefore have an urbanising impact on the otherwise rural character and appearance of the locality through the introduction of additional built form and a formalised vehicular access. The proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of policies CS1, CS4 and CS13 of the Core Strategy, Policies DM2 and DM22 of the Joint Development Management Policies Document and the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.


3.   Policies DM2 and DM22 of the Development Management Policies Document states that proposals for all development should not adversely affect residential amenity, nor the amenities of adjacent areas by reason of noise, smell, vibration, overlooking, overshadowing, loss of light, light pollution, and volume or type of vehicular activity generation. Given the negligeable distance provided between the proposed access and the residential property of Landmark, the vehicular movements to and from the new dwellings are considered to result in a detrimental impact to their residential amenity by virtue of noise, light pollution, vibrations and potential overlooking from the comings and goings and lights of vehicles along the access. As such, the proposal is considered to be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework and provisions of the Joint Development Management Policies Document, in particular to Policies DM2 and DM22, in respect of residential amenity.

Supporting documents: