PROPOSAL: Proposed single storey detached residential annex and garden storage used ancillary to the host dwelling (Elm Gardens) following demolition of existing residential outbuilding.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit.

7.8            This application was for a proposed single storey detached residential annex and garden storage used ancillary to the host dwelling (Elm Gardens) following demolition of existing residential outbuilding.  The Planning Committee had visited the application site on Wednesday 24 May 2023.

7.9            The Development Management Team Manager (South) advised that the application site comprised a detached dwelling with a large outbuilding to the rear and was located to the western side of Badgeworth Road within the Green Belt.  The application proposed to replace the existing outbuilding with an annex to provide a disabled accessible single storey one bedroom unit with an attached garden store.  The proposed building would have a simple linear pitched roof design which would be finished in render and slate.  It would be smaller than the building it replaced, would have a lesser impact upon the openness of the Green Belt and would be of an acceptable design and appearance.  Given the substantial curtilage and separation from any nearby properties, there would be no adverse impact to any other occupiers.  He drew attention to a typographical error at Page No. 49, Paragraph 10.1 of the Committee report and clarified that the Council’s Land Drainage Engineer had raised no objections to the proposal, as correctly set out at Page No. 48, Paragraph 8.30 of the Committee report.  Members were advised that the proposal would accord with Policies RES10 and GRB4 of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan and Policy SD5 of the Joint Core Strategy and it was therefore recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the condition set out in the Committee report.

7.10          The Chair invited the applicant’s agent to address the Committee.  The applicant’s agent indicated that he was disappointed not to have been notified of the Planning Committee Site Visit which had taken place yesterday which was why the site was not accessible.  He indicated that there was currently a mobile home on the site which was occupied by the family whilst their house was being renovated; his understanding was this was temporary and would be removed by the end of the year when the work was completed.  He advised that the proposed annex building was required by the property owners for a disabled family member who used a wheelchair and required suitable level access accommodation over a single storey. In order to cater for their needs, the annex building was situated in close proximity to, and had a functions link with, the host dwelling.  The Tewkesbury Borough Plan was supportive of the provision of such annexes to support households and it was acknowledged that the Planning Officer agreed that the principle of development was acceptable.  The new building was formed following the removal of a pair of ancillary residential outbuildings within the established curtilage of Elm Gardens which had become redundant for use.  It was recognised that the site was located within the Green Belt; however, replacement residential buildings were allowed in the Green Belt where the new residential building was not materially larger than the one it replaced.  In this instance, the new building would result in a 29% reduction in footprint, a 28% reduction in volume and a 30cm reduction in height over existing outbuildings to be removed.  Therefore, the proposals would be materially smaller than the existing outbuildings, supporting the openness of the Green Belt in this area.  The new building had been designed to match the character and materials of the host dwelling at Elm Gardens which the Planning Officer noted would represent a visual improvement to the area.  Matters relating to neighbouring amenity, highway impact, drainage and trees had been considered by Officers and statutory consultees and no objections had been raised subject to conditions.  Furthermore, there had been no objections raised by neighbouring residents.  In conclusion, the applicant’s agent felt it was clear that the proposed annex was acceptable in principle and would meet the requirements of local and national Green Belt policy.  The proposed reduction in built form and a design to match the host dwelling would also have a significant beneficial impact on the character of the area and the openness of the Green Belt in this location.  For the avoidance of doubt, he clarified that the applicant was agreeable to the suggested range of conditions imposed by the Planning Officer.  Overall, the proposals accorded with the development plan and he hoped the Planning Committee would feel able to support the Officer recommendation and permit the application.

7.11          The Chair indicated that the Officer recommendation was to permit and he sought a motion from the floor.  A Member questioned whether any renewable energy and energy efficiency measures had been considered as part of this application and he was advised that no specific measures were being proposed.  The Member sought clarification as to how compliance with condition 3 would be managed in terms of the development only being used in conjunction with, and as ancillary to, the residential enjoyment of the adjoining dwelling house.  In response, the Development Management Team Manager (South) advised that if any reports were received of the building being used in any other manner, the planning authority had powers to investigate; however, it was noted that the location of the building in the back garden was not conducive to occupation as a separate unit.  As referenced by the applicant’s agent, a Member pointed out that the Planning Committee had not been able to access the site when they had visited yesterday and she felt it would be appropriate to have a further visit on that basis.  As such, it was proposed and seconded that the application be deferred for a Planning Committee Site Visit to assess the appropriateness of the development in Green Belt policy terms. 

7.12          Upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED           That the application be DEFERRED for a Planning Committee Site Visit to assess the appropriateness of the development in Green Belt policy terms.