The Planning Inspector last week dismissed an appeal against West Devon Borough Council’s refusal to approve an application to build a holiday chalet at Morwellham.
The application to build holiday let accommodation on the site of an existing garage and storage building was originally turned down by the borough council as the proposed building was deemed to be in an ‘unsuitable location’ that was too far away from a ‘mixed use centre’ and not served well by public transport.
Furthermore, it was argued that the applicant had failed to provide sufficient evidence that there was more need for holiday accommodation in the area and did not ‘deliver on-site low carbon or renewable energy systems.’
However, the planning inspector has upheld the council’s decision, writing: ‘the site provides reasonably poor access to the local footpath network’ and ‘there does not appear to be any local facilities’ and concluding: ‘The proposal would, however, not provide a holiday let in a suitable location and the scheme would conflict with the Local Plan approach to sustainable development. Consequently, the harm related to the conflict with these identified planning policies, which would outweigh the positive aspects of the proposal, including the benefits to the local economy, would be such that the proposal would conflict with the development plan when taken as a whole.’
In other planning news an application (2790/23/HHO) has been submitted for the construction of a new outbuilding and an outdoor swimming pool for private use at a North Tawton residence.
Another application (2735/23/FUL) for the construction of eight retirement bungalows in Whitchurch, Tavistock has also been submitted.
The plan proposed building five two-bedroom properties and three one-bedroom properties on the site with individual access to each home and a communal garden. On-site parking for carers and relatives has been put forward too.
An application (2025/23/HHO) for a two-storey rear extension to a house in Tavistock was opposed as it would ‘have an adverse impact on the non-designated heritage asset and the character and appearance of the surrounding area, including the Tavistock Conservation Area’ and ‘by virtue of its position and height in relation to the neighbouring property, would introduce greater opportunities for overlooking and would result in a harmful impact on neighbour amenity.’ The council also raised concerns that the proposed extension was located in an important drainage area and concluded that insufficient information about water drainage and flood risk had been submitted.