Agenda item

RESOLVED:

(1)  That application 21/03533/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the completion of the S106 agreement and deed of variation, the applicant agreeing to any necessary extensions to the statutory determination period to achieve this and to request additional comments from the Lead Local Flood Authority and to add any condition(s) they request before the grant of planning permission.

(2)  Independently to the grant of planning permission for the Council to investigate whether a group Tree Preservation Order (TPO) should be served on the trees outside the application site immediately to the south to secure their long term protection following an assessment of the state and condition of the trees.

Audio recording – 248 minutes 20 seconds

The Development and Conservation Manager advised Members of the following updates to the report:

·        A late representation was submitted regarding the report and the author was advised to circulate these to Members directly.

·        The trees to the south of the site are not within the site boundary and so cannot be conditioned as such.

·        There were three options available to Members; to rely on the existing legal agreements in place, to require new screen planting along the southern part of the site to replace any lost trees or the Council could impose a group tree protection order, which can be imposed outside of planning permission on the site.

In response to a question, the Development and Conservation Manager advised that there was no known threat to the trees to the south of the site, this was meant to provide Members with potential options they could take if they felt appropriate.

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report in respect of application 21/03533/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The Chair invited Ms Lynn Bogie to speak against the application.

Ms Bogie thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation, including:

·        Previous applications have been made on this site, all of which have been rejected or withdrawn following consultation.

·        The previous application was not supported by the Planning Officer and was subsequently rejected by the Committee.

·        This application now has support from the Planning Officer, but nothing regarding the site has changed. There is no easy access to the site and it is situated away from local amenities.

·        The only change is that the application is now for 3 larger houses, as opposed to the 6 smaller dwellings previously proposed.

·        Previous application had been refused to the inadequacy of the flood risk assessment and no further evidence has been provided by the applicant for this application.

·        Although the LLFA is not a statutory consultee, they wrote to the Development and Conservation Manager to outline that they had not removed their objection.

·        The pollution risk assessment is incomplete and has not considered recent developments, but rather takes into account information and evidence which is now a further two years out of date from the previous application.

There were no points of clarification for Ms Bogie from Members and the Chair thanked him for his presentation.

The Chair invited Mr Michael Calder, as the applicant and applicant’s representative, to speak in support of the application.

Mr Calder thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and advised of the following:

·        This application has come following the rejection of a previous scheme and has seen the number of houses on the site reduced.

·        Officers have provided their detailed reports into the application and there had been no objections received from statutory consultees.

·        The proposals allow for a new opportunity on the site, which currently has no value to the countryside, has a history of commercial use and is almost entirely concrete.

·        At present the site has large and visible gates at the front, the development would improve the site and increase the standing of this part of the village, as the gates and fences would be replaced with nicer and softer options.

·        Proposals will integrate with the rural setting of the site and would include a biodiversity net gain, substantially above the 10% required.

·        The scheme would see 9 people employed throughout the process and would increase spending at facilities in the village.

There were no points of clarification for Mr Calder from Members and the Chair thanked him for his presentation.

The following Members took part in the debate:

·        Councillor Alistair Willoughby

·        Councillor Tony Hunter

·        Councillor Simon Bloxham

·        Councillor Tom Tyson

Points raised in the debate included:

·        The proposals seem an improvement to the site as currently situated and would be more in keeping with the village.

·        It would be possible, should the application be approved, that further conditions could be held with the LLFA regarding further conditions to allay any outstanding concerns they had regarding the plans.

·        Sufficient progress had been made on the application to warrant approval, following the reduction of dwellings on the site and subsequent changes to their impact on the surrounding area.

·        A group tree protection order on the trees outside the boundary to the south of the site would be the preferred way of ensuring their existence.

Councillor Alistair Willoughby proposed and Councillor Tony Hunter seconded and, following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED:

(1)   That application 21/03533/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and with the following additional condition:

“That the applicant agrees all necessary extensions to the statutory determination period to enable the completion of the deed of variation S106 agreement.  In the event that agreement is not secured to extend the statutory determination that the members allow the Development and Conservation Manager to refuse planning permission based on absence of the requisite legal agreement”

(2)   Independently to the grant of planning permission for the Council to investigate whether a group Tree Preservation Order (TPO) should be served on the trees outside the application site immediately to the south to secure their long term protection following an assessment of the state and condition of the trees.