Core Refusal Reason
The proposal failed to demonstrate compliance with rural housing and replacement dwelling criteria, failed to address coastal erosion and climate change risks, and proposed an inappropriate design that would negatively impact residential and visual amenities in a High Amenity zone.
Decision Maker's Conclusion
- The applicant failed to provide necessary evidence regarding exceptional circumstances for replacement, 7-year occupancy history, and potential impacts on climate change, coastal erosion, or European Sites.
- The site is located in a coastal erosion risk area, and the application lacked sufficient data on erosion impacts, climate change predictions, or mitigation measures.
- The design and scale of the dwelling, specifically the rear dormer, would result in overlooking and overbearance of neighboring properties and fails to integrate with the sensitive High Amenity landscape.
Cited Policies (CDP)
Policy SPQHP57Objective SPQHO100Objective DMSO47Objective GINHO76Objective DMSO163HA zoning objectivePolicy GINHP28Objective GINHO67Table 14.9
Decision Document Summary
This application sought outline permission for the demolition of an existing chalet and the construction of a replacement dwelling at Monterey, Six Cross Lane, Rush. The site is situated within a High Amenity (HA) zone and an area identified as being at risk of coastal erosion. The local authority refused permission because the applicant failed to justify the replacement dwelling under rural housing policies, failed to address environmental risks including coastal erosion and climate change, and...SOURCE PDFOpen Original
Note: If code appears below, the council site is blocking the preview. Please open the original file.