Issue - meetings

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

Permission in Principle: Erection of seven dwellings.

RESOLVED: That application 20/01605/PIP be REFUSED permission in principle as per the reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Audio Recording – 6 Minutes 34 Seconds

NB: Councillor Daniel Allen joined the meeting at the start of the item.

The Senior Strategic Sites Officer presented the report in respect of application 20/01605/PIP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans and provided the Committee with the following updates:

·                On page 9 of the report, the word ‘not’ should be added in between ‘does’ and ‘supersede’  so that it reads: ‘A representation was made by CPRE - Objection – Absence of 5 year housing land supply does not supersede Local Plan policies […].

·                A late representation had been received by the Historic Environment. The representation had no objection in principle, with advice given as to further details required at technical details stage. The representation did not impact on the Officer’s recommendation.

Councillor Ken Langley, Chairman of Reed Parish Council, thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee in objection to application 20/01605/PIP, including:

·                43 villagers in a population a little over 300 had submitted written objections;

·                The application site was an unsuitable location for housing in Reed;

·                The site was not needed for housing in Reed;

·                Building on the site would irretrievably damage the character and beauty of the village and harm heritage in Reed;

·                The application was hostile to the Council’s Emergent Local Plan;

·                The development was outside the settlement boundary for Reed;

·                Reed was already making a more than proportionate contribution to District housing need.  In 2011 there were 134 houses. Today there were 149, an 11% growth rate in a village with a First school, but no shop or pub; and

·                The development would harm the conservation area and damage the beauty and heritage value which was a precious asset of the village, as detailed on the Officer’s report at paragraphs 4.3.13 and 4.3.14.

Councillor Gerald Morris, Member Advocate, thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee, including:

·                There was no great urgency for the property developer to build on this agricultural land beyond greenbelt;

·                A Permission in Principle application was a short cut method to try and easily obtain initial planning consent;

·                Owing to the short time officers had to determine the PIP application, concerned villagers and the Parish Council also had little time to consider and comment on the application; and

·                It was the right decision to refuse the application.

Councillor Tony Hunter proposed to refuse Permission in Principle which was seconded by Councillor Morgan Derbyshire and upon being put to the vote, it was:

RESOLVED: That application 20/01605/PIP be REFUSED permission in principle as per the reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.