A FAMILY has won permission for a new two-storey home in a Furness village.

Donna Knowles, of Kirkby-in-Furness, told councillors her family would have to leave if planning permission was refused for the zero-carbon home as there were no other five-bedroom properties suitable locally.

Mrs Knowles, who lives opposite Burlington School, addressed South Lakeland District Council’s planning committee. She explained she and her husband Brian married in August 2018 and had an extended family of six children.

They bought their bungalow last December believing they would be able to build a home in the neighbouring paddock, allowing her father to move into the bungalow, she said.

Mrs Knowles, who works in Barrow, told the committee: “We all love Kirkby and wouldn’t want to leave. There have been no objections and a new housing estate consisting of 50 houses is to be built just across the road.

“Please let us build our family home here.”

But South Lakeland District Council planning officers said it was contrary to policy and recommended it be rejected.

Officers said the bungalow and stables were inside the village ‘settlement boundary’ but the paddock was not inside the line. Therefore, it was classed as ‘open countryside’, where development was not allowed.

Mrs Knowles’ planning agent Kate Bellwood reminded councillors of SLDC’s self-build policy – aimed at encouraging people to build their own homes.

“If you feel the building complies with the self-build policy, then you can lawfully make this decision, even if it conflicts with the boundary line policy,” said Ms Bellwood.

“Nothing in planning is ever black and white.”

Mark Lynch, interim development team leader for SLDC, warned that a decision to ‘breach’ the boundary could prevent the council reining in future development at the site. “What you will do is lay a marker in the sand,” he said.

Councillors heard there was every chance the boundary line could be extended. Cllr John Holmes said officers were ‘sympathetic’ but ‘hog-tied’ by policy.  Cllr Holmes said: “It seems to me we have got a family here actively engaged in the community. Our sole purpose is to keep our villages sustainable. If we turned this down all we would really be doing is telling these people to go elsewhere.”

Councillors voted 12 in favour with one against that the house could go-ahead.