Agenda item

To determine the application.

Appendix 2 to this report comprises exempt information - to exclude the public (including the press) from a meeting of a committee it is necessary for the following proposition to be moved and adopted: “that the public be excluded from the meeting for Items which would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

Matthew Leigh explained that this application has been returned to the committee because officers feel it has similarities to the previous application. He advised members that the application came before the committee on the 25 June for a new dwelling and it had two recommended reasons for refusal, one in relation to the impact on the Listed Building and one in relation to access issues and highway matters.

Matthew Leigh added that at that meeting members resolved to grant planning permission and the reason this has now come back to the committee is because officers consider that the legal advice which has been received is directly applicable and relevant to this application. He added that because of that advice it was thought to be appropriate to bring it forwards for the attention of members.

Matthew Leigh explained that the application is still recommended for refusal, however, members acceptance and consideration that there are no issues in relation to the access and the highway has fallen away from the officer’s recommendation due to the fact that they are minded of the resolution of the committee. He added that the application has been brought back to the committee in relation to the impact on the Listed Building because of the consistencies with the previous application.

Matthew Leigh added that only those members who were present at that meeting can take part in any discussion or voting.

Kimberley Crow presented an overview of the application to the committee.

The Legal Officer explained that it is important for members to consider the potential harm to the heritage asset of the Listed Building whilst bearing in mind their duty under the Section 62 legislation. She added that members need to consider whether in their view any potential harm to the Listed Building would amount to total loss, substantial harm to the building or its setting, less than substantial harm to the building or its setting or no harm at all.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Mrs French expressed the opinion that there is no harm whatsoever to the Listed Building as the proposed dwelling is located a fair distance from the existing dwelling.

·         Councillor Benney stated that he agrees with Councillor Mrs French and added that he had stated on the previous occasion that the proposed dwelling would cause minimal harm, however, having reread all the reports and associated information he is now of the opinion that there is no harm. He added that he fails to see the similarity between this application and the earlier application which members reconsidered, with this application being for one back land dwelling whereas the other application is for five dwellings and he fails to see what the differences and similarities are. Councillor Benney made the point that he does not believe that the proposal will cause any harm to the Listed Building because of the distance between the two properties.

·         Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that she had originally considered that there would be less than substantial harm which in turn meant that she was considering the possible public benefit. She added that previously she had mentioned viability as, in her view, Listed Buildings need to be preserved and whilst at the previous meeting she had considered the fact that the owner needed to move into a smaller dwelling, she had concerns about the viability of the Listed Building. Councillor Sennitt Clough expressed the view that it is her understanding that no viability has come forward with the application and, therefore, she feels that she has no option but to go with the officer’s recommendation in light of the lack of information relating to viability coming forward.

·         Councillor Marks stated that he does not see the proposed dwelling having any detrimental effect on the Listed Building as it cannot be seen. He expressed the view that the building is located 60 metres or so back from the other property and there are other buildings closer to the Listed Building including the Public House and it could be said that the Public House detracts from the Grade 2 Listed Building as well. Councillor Marks stated that he is of the opinion that he will go against the officer’s recommendation.

·         Councillor Benney made the point that the officer’s recommendation appears to be based on the views of the Conservation Officer and conservationists like to conserve things. He added that there are no objections to the proposal and whilst he accepts the professionalism of the Conservation Officer it is only their opinion and he has a different opinion.

It was proposed by Councillor Sennitt Clough to refuse planning permission, however, that proposal was not supported by the committee and therefore failed.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Benney and agreed that the application be GRANTED against the officer’s recommendation with authority delegated to officers to apply conditions.

Members do not support officers’ recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel the proposal will not detrimentally harm the setting of the Listed Building.

(Appendix 2 to the report involved the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended))

(Councillor Connor took no part in the item in its entirety as he was not present at the meeting when the application was originally determined. Councillor Marks chaired this item)

(All members present declared that the applicant is a fellow councillor, but they do not socialise with him and will consider the application with an open mind)

(Councillor Mrs French declared, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that she is a member of March Town Council but takes no part in planning)