Agenda item

NED/22/00198/FL - STRETTON

Section 73 application pursuant of 18/00801/FL to vary condition 2 (approved plans) at ‘Erzamine’, Highstairs Lane, Stretton


(Planning Manager – Development Management)


The report to Committee explained that a ‘Section 73’ Application had been submitted to substitute the existing plans, previously agreed by the Committee, with amended plans at Erzamine, High Street Lane, Stretton. Under these amended plans the plot for the new building would be re-located further west on the site, to that originally agreed. The Application had been referred to Committee at request of Councillor W Armitage, who had raised concerns about it.


Planning Committee was recommended to approve the Application, subject to the conditions set out in the report.


The report to Committee explained why Members were asked to approve the recommendations.  Re-positioning the plot would not alter the design, scale or massing of the new building. As such, Officers believed that the change would not have an unduly significant detrimental impact on the neighbouring property. Although the new dwelling would be closer to it, they contended that sufficient space would continue to exist between them and that no ‘overlook’ of the existing dwelling would be created.


Before Members discussed the Application those registered to speak were asked to address the Committee. S Ross objected to the Application. The Applicant, J Rowles, spoke in support of it.


Committee considered the Application.  It took into account the previous planning history. Committee heard how the principle of residential development on the site in a countryside location had been accepted when planning permission had been granted for the original application NED/18/00801/FL. Committee considered the impact on the proposed change on the character of the surrounding area. It also took into account the implications of the changed plans on the Residential Amenity of neighbouring properties.


Members discussed the Application. They reflected on the original planning permission granted for the site. They considered the reasons for the proposed changes. In particular, they heard how under the revised plans a larger back garden area to the rear of the new property would be created. Some Members queried why the requirement for a larger back garden had not been taken into account when the original plans had been submitted.


Members also discussed what impact the proposed relocation of the plot would have on the amenity of neighbouring property, including its visual impact. They considered whether this could be ameliorated through the imposition of appropriate conditions, such as the addition of mature vegetation or other appropriate screening. During the discussion some Members expressed their concern that because of the topography of the site, the new dwelling might now appear overbearing to the neighbouring property. They did not think that this would be acceptable. Committee was reminded in this context of policy SDC12, to protect the amenity of existing occupiers when agreeing new developments


At the conclusion of the discussion, Councillor W Armitage and Councillor M Foster moved and seconded a motion to reject the Application, contrary to officer recommendations. The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.




That the Application be refused, contrary to officer recommendations.




  1. The proposal is considered unacceptable as by reason of its scale and location the dwelling proposed on plot 1 would be prominent, overbearing and adversely affect the residential amenity and living conditions of the occupiers of Moorfields contrary to North East Derbyshire Local Plan policies SS1, SS2, SS9, SDC3 and SDC12.


Supporting documents: