Issue - meetings

RESOLVED: That application 24/00482/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager with the following two additional Informatives and amendments to Condition 5:

“Condition 5

None of the trees to be retained on the application site shall be felled, lopped, topped, uprooted, removed or otherwise destroyed or killed without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority. On the tree report these trees are: T2- T11 and H2 Leyland Cypress hedge.

Reason: To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the completed development and the visual amenity of the locality.

Ecology Informative

The applicant is advised to avoid the bird nesting season, or if this cannot be avoided the site should be checked for nesting birds prior to any site clearance taking place.

The applicant is advised if bats are found during the course of any work to buildings or trees where not previously anticipated, then works should immediately stop and Natural England notified for appropriate advice.

Drainage Condition

Prior to the undertaking of works above ground level, details of surface water drainage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Approved details will be implemented and maintained thereafter.

Reason: To safeguard neighbouring dwellings in accordance with policies D1 and NE8 of the Local Plan.”

Audio recording – 6 minutes 36 seconds

The Planning Officer provided an update that the applicant had agreed to additional informatives and amendments as set out in Condition 5.

The Planning Officer presented the report in respect of Application 24/00482/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The following Members asked questions:

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor Louise Peace

In response to questions, the Planning Officer advised that:

·       The removal of apple trees would be covered by the landscaping provision.

·       A site notice was displayed.

·       Refuse bins would need to be taken to the main road for collection, in line with the existing dwellings.

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

·       He was the representative for 6 homes that would be affected by this development.

·       This development would cause a loss of privacy to the rear gardens.

·       The trees on the western boundary were deciduous, so would not provide cover in the winter months.

·       Construction of the properties could damage existing tree roots and new saplings would take 15 years to mature.

·       The 4 cottages in the main street were low and would be overshadowed by the development.

·       The site was situated on heavy clay sub soil and would not provide adequate drainage in heavy rain.

·       The development would bring extra traffic to the area.

·       The biodiversity net gain by providing swift boxes would not compensate for the loss of the natural habitat.

·       He agreed with the view of the Parish Council that this was an inappropriate building on a high piece of land that would be obtrusive to neighbours.

In response to a point of clarification from Councillor Ruth Brown, Mr Hofton advised that the higher piece of land was approximately 2 – 2.5 meters from ground level, but he could not confirm this.

The Chair thanked Mr Hofton for his presentation.

In response to points raised, the Planning Officer advised that:

·       The distance to the dwellings was 30 meters to 1 Maiden Cottages and 27 meters to 2 Maiden Cottages cottage. The outbuildings were 16 meters and 18 meters respectively.

·       The application was submitted before biodiversity net gain was a requirement.

·       The trees were protected by the conservation area and would be required to be replaced.

Councillor Michael Muir proposed to grant permission and this was seconded by Councillor Ruth Brown.

The following Members took part in the debate:

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

·       Councillor Val Bryant

·       Councillor Nigel Mason

·       Councillor Elizabeth Dennis

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

Points raised in the debate included:

·       The recommendation from highways regarding the distance of the bins from the properties should be noted.

·       Residents would be required to bring their refuse bins to roadside for collection.

·       This development could not be refused on the grounds of privacy to neighbours.

·       The planning balance was not a sustainable argument to refuse this application.

In response to points raised, the Conservation and Development Manager  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71