Issue - meetings

RESOLVED: That application 22/01229/FP be REFUSED planning permission due to the following reasons; the scheme is considered contrary to Local Plan policies that inform on appropriate development in Rural Area beyond the Green Belt. The proposal fails to comply with any of the criteria within Policies SP2 and CGB1 of the Local Plan, as the proposal is not considered to fall within the remit of infill development given the sizable and spacious nature of the plot. Moreover, the scheme would be harmful to the character and appearance of the village and would be at odds with the sporadic pattern of development that makes up the settlement of Kelshall. The proposal is therefore deemed contrary to Policies SP2, D1 and CGB1 of the Local Plan, as well as Section 12 of the NPPF.

Audio recording – 30 minutes 12 seconds

The Planning Officer provided the following updates:

·         An amended ecological assessment was submitted on 6 December, but this did not change the report.

·         A number of emails had been circulated, including a statement from the ecologist, a statement from the agent of the applicant and further details on the plans regarding hedgerows.

·         The report details that the hedgerow would be removed, but the amended plans show that of the 55 metres of hedgerow, 12.5m would be removed and 8.3m would be replanted, leaving a space of around 4.2m for access.

·         Point 4.3.38 of the report should read that the ‘proposed development would not result in an increase in flooding.’

·         Councillor Morris, who had called in the application, had emailed Natural England to comment, but no response had yet been received.

The Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 22/01229/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·         Councillor Tom Tyson

·         Councillor Michael Muir

In response to questions, the Planning Officer advised:

·         There was roughly 12m of hedgerow to be removed and around 8.5m would be replanted, with new planting.

·         The new hedgerows to be planted total 121m in length, which would be 116.8m more hedgerow than on site currently.

·         The pond shown on plans was owned by the applicant, but it was outside of the application area, shown by the red line on the plans.

·         It would not be possible to condition the applicant to maintain the pond, as this was outside of the application area.

The Chair invited Mr Peter Gartside to speak against the application. Mr Gartside thanked the Chair for the opportunity and provided the Committee with a verbal presentation, including:

·         He was representing the Parish Council and the objections of the parishioners are well documented.

·         There was much to like in the adopted Local Plan and they had no objections to the policy of infilling, but this application was on an awkward site squeezed between a footpath and a road.

·         The village dated back to Domesday and was popular with walkers.

·         For residents this site was the least suitable site for infill and there were concerns that if this application was allowed, much more infill would happen in the village.

·         Kelshall was currently made up of 44 houses, with spacing between each dwelling.

·         If all infill applications were the size of this application, there would be an additional 38 homes of this size in Kelshall.

·         This would drastically alter the character of the village and would not accord with the term ‘limited infill’ described in the Local Plan.

·         If this application was approved it would make infill developments a first-come-first-served basis and developers would be driving policy, not planning officers.

·         Kelshall was a category B village in the Local Plan and was one of the smallest for infill possibilities.

The Chair invited Councillor Gerald Morris to speak against the application, as Member Advocate. Councillor Morris thanked the Chair for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49