Accessibility settings

In order to remember your preferences as you navigate through the site, a cookie will be set.

Color preference

Text size

Agenda item

21/00702/FUL - Framfield, Two Hedges Road, Woodmancote

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey side extension (resubmission).




32.14        This application was for the erection of a single storey side extension (resubmission).

32.15        The Planning Officer advised that a Committee determination was required as the Parish Council had objected on the grounds that the proposed extension would be overdevelopment and there would be a negative impact on the Green Belt.  Whilst the Parish Council’s concerns had been noted, the ‘studio outbuilding’ as granted under the 2020 certificate of lawfulness application (CLP) would be in the same location as the proposed extension and only marginally smaller.  Therefore, there was a reasonable prospect that the CLP proposal would be implemented if the current application was refused.  Although the proposed extension would be a disproportionate addition of 65% when added to the previous 2019 extension, the realistic fallback position was considered to amount to very special circumstances.  With regard to overdevelopment, this would be a relatively modest single storey side extension and there would still be adequate garden space remaining at the front and rear of the plot.  Overall, the proposal was considered to be of an acceptable size and design and would not be harmful to the openness of the Green Belt, therefore, the Officer recommendation was to permit the application.

32.16        The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent indicated that he wished to fully endorse the Officer recommendation.  There was little to add to the Officer report which, along with the plans and the presentation, clearly explained the situation and why planning permission should be granted.  Although a similar application was previously refused, it had been shown that an almost identical structure to that proposed could be built without planning permission.  The Officer presentation demonstrated how an even larger outbuilding could also be constructed in the rear garden under permitted development rights.  In the context of that fallback position, Officers rightly considered that any harm caused by the small extension would be less significant than that which would occur anyway and so the application was acceptable.  That was the correct interpretation of case law and appeal precedent around this subject and provided the very special circumstances which may be needed to approve this proposal.  The extension was sensitively designed to reflect the main house and was a small single storey addition which did not affect neighbouring amenity.  No objections had been received from neighbouring residents and, although the Parish Council had objected on the basis of this being overdevelopment of the plot, the plot was large and could comfortably accommodate this small extension.  The applicant’s agent hoped Members would agree that the application was completely acceptable as proposed and grant planning permission in line with the Officer recommendation.

32.17        The Chair indicated that the Officer recommendation was to permit the application and he sought a motion from the floor.  It was proposed and seconded that the application be permitted in accordance with the Officer recommendation and, upon being taken to the vote, it was

RESOLVED           That the application be PERMITTED in accordance with the Officer recommendation.

Supporting documents: