Agenda item

Erection of detached dwelling and detached garage (Resubmission of application 1/1093/2021/FUL) - Koversada, Diddywell Road, Appledore.


The following Councillors had attended the site visit listed below:


Councillors:  C Leather, R Boughton, M Brown, P Christie, R Craigie, R Lock, P Watson and R Wiseman



Application No. 1/0271/2022/FUL - Erection of detached dwelling and detached garage (Resubmission of application 1/1093/2021/FUL) - Koversada, Diddywell Road, Appledore


Interests:  None


Officer recommendation:  Refuse



The planning application had been called into Plans Committee by Councillor Hames if minded to approve and Councillor Ford if minded to refuse for the following reasons:


Councillor Hames


1.    Impact on character, appearance and tranquillity of Undeveloped Coast

2.    Site is outside Development Area

3.    Contributing to coalescence between Appledore and Northam (ref LP Policy NOR Spatial Strategy)

4.    Design of new dwelling incompatible with adjacent house and street scene

5.    Impact on amenity of Koversada

6.    Highways implications of more traffic on narrow lane


Councillor Ford


I believe there is a balance to be struck reference social gain and to provide a family support network.   Surely me/or the Committee could impose conditions or ties (new house and existing must go together should future use or sale happen).



The Principal Planning Officer presented the report and informed Members of the main planning considerations and the reasoning for the recommendation of refusal.


The following update was given:


“Amendment to Refusal Reason 2 – The site lies WITHIN the designated Coast and Estuary Zone.”


During the debate the following comments/points were made:


·         No detrimental impact on the open countryside because development is within the curtilage of another property.


·         If approved could a condition be imposed attaching the two properties?  The Planning Manager advised a condition could not be imposed, but PD Rights could be removed.


·         Considered it to be sustainable development and does not impact on Koversada as proposal is within the curtilage of that property.


·         The site was not thought to be isolated.


Councillor Christie considered the application should be refused as the proposal is for an open market dwelling, although the applicants claim it is for a local needs dwelling.  


Following an enquiry from Councillor Watson, the Principal Planning Officer confirmed the applicants could come back with an application for a local needs dwelling, but the application for determination today is for an open market dwelling.  Although not a rural settlement the development is in the open countryside. 


It became evident from comments made during the debate that Members were supportive of the application.  The Planning Manager gave advice to Members should they go against the recommendation of refusal by the Principal Planning Officer.  If the application was to be approved, he advised that a landscaping scheme be submitted, and that Members discuss conditions to be imposed with the Officer.


It was proposed by Councillor McGeough, seconded by Councillor Craigie that the application be approved.


A recorded vote was taken.






Cllr R Boughton




Cllr M Brown




Cllr P Christie




Cllr R Craigie




Cllr C Leather




Cllr R Lock




Cllr D McGeough




Cllr P Watson




Cllr R Wiseman





(Vote: For 7, Against 2)



That the application be Granted subject to the wording of the conditions being delegated to Officers in conjunction with the Chair and Vice Chair.



Mr James McEldon addressed the Committee in support of the application

Mr Shorne Tilbey addressed the Committee in support of the application

Councillor Hames, Ward Member, addressed the Committee


Supporting documents: