Meeting documents

Application Proposal:  Erection of two storey side extension to dwellinghouse

The Planning Officer introduced the report and with the aid of slides and photographs summarised the details of the application as set out in the agenda.  There were no updates to the report.  The key consideration was the impact on the setting of the Grade II listed church. The Planning Officer’s recommendation was for refusal.

The Legal Services Manager referred to the statutory duty on the LPA to pay special regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of a listed building, which requires more than a passing regard to such a setting.  The duty is more than just another material consideration and creates a strong statutory presumption against planning permission being granted.

She indicated that recent High Court rulings had made it very clear that when an authority finds that a proposed development would harm the setting of a listed building it must give that appropriate weight.  Where harm is identified, but members were of the view that the application should be approved, they would need to be clear that there was sufficient ‘public benefit’ to outweigh the harm caused.  Her further advice was that a proposal which improved the living environment of the applicants did not amount to ‘public benefit’.

In response to member questions, the Planning Officer advised that:

·         A further explanation was given about what view could be seen from the A30;

·         The planting of leylandii was not a development that could be controlled;

·         The property housed a young family who needed a third bedroom to remain in the parish.  Other options to extend the property were possible.  A single storey extension wouldn’t have the same impact as the proposed development;

·         The response from the parish council was becoming a common response from parish councils;

·         The harm was considered significant enough to recommend refusal;

·         Members could only consider the proposal before them;

·         It was accepted that the application was an improvement on the original scheme but it was still considered to adversely impact upon the setting of the church.

The Committee was addressed by the Agent, Mr Parkin who felt that the proposal would not affect the listed building in a negative way.  The property already had solar roof panels and a conservatory which he considered to be harmful.  The most controversial view could only be seen when the trees were bare. He was of the opinion that you wouldn’t look at the church from the A30 because the view was very restricted.  He commented that the Parish Council, neighbours and the ward member all agreed that the extension would cause no harm.

Ward Member, Councillor Ric Pallister commented that the classic view of the church was from outside under the bridge from West Coker and the second view was from Odcombe Hollow.  The view along the A30 was a short stretch of 30 metres.    He proposed that members accept that there was no significant harm to the setting of the listed church.

During discussion on the application, members concurred with the ward member and felt that the application should be approved. They considered that the main view of the church was coming down and out of the Odcombe Hollow turning as well as coming from West Coker and that the key views of the church tower would not be affected by the proposed development.   

The Ward Member confirmed that the Parish Council had a long debate on the application and supported the proposal.

It was proposed and seconded to approve the application contrary to the Planning Officer’s recommendation.  The Area Lead suggested the reason for approval and this was agreed by members.  On being put to the vote the proposal was carried unanimously.