Agenda item

To determine the application

Alison Hoffman presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Adam Sutton, the agent.  Mr Sutton referred to the officer stating that this site is located in a unsustainable location where future occupiers would be reliant on private motor vehicles to access services and facilities and he would argue that the whole of Colletts Bridge rely on private motor vehicles to access services and facilities and yet Colletts Bridge is still included in the adopted Local Plan under Policy LP3 as an Other Village within the development hierarchy, which is the strategy for sustainable development, therefore, in his view, the use of private motor vehicles for these reasons making the development unsustainable would be contrary to the inclusion of Colletts Bridge within Policy LP3 of the Local Plan.

Mr Sutton referred to Policy LP12 which states that unlike the previous Local Plan there will be no fixed development area boundaries around each of the settlements, yet, in his view, the officer is trying to justify that this infill development is contrary to policy, which they should not be doing to determine this planning application.  He stated that application is for a proposed dwelling in Colletts Bridge, which is listed in Policy LP3 under Other Villages, which states that residential development will be considered on its merits and will normally be restricted to single dwelling infill sites situated in otherwise built-up frontage, which, in his view, perfectly describes this application.

Mr Sutton referred to the officer drawing comparisons to a previous appeal decision for a development in Crooked Bank and made the point that Crooked Bank is located in the settlement of Begdale, which is not listed within Policy LP3, and therefore, he does not feel that comparisons can truly be made between the sites.  He stated that the officer concludes that to allow this application would set an unacceptable precedent for development in this unsustainable location but, in his view, the precedent of a single infill development in Colletts Bridge has already been set by the Local Plan.

Mr Sutton expressed the view that the proposed dwelling is in keeping with its surroundings, does not cause harm or adversely affect the local area, there are no statutory consultee objections having worked proactively with Highways to revise the site plans to show the visibility splays and no objections from local residents, with the only objection being from officers.  He urged members to approve this application for a single infill dwelling within Colletts Bridge.

Members asked questions of officers as follows:

·         Councillor Mrs French asked where Crooked Bank is?  Alison Hoffman responded that it is in Begdale, off Redmoor Lane near Little Ranch.

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

·         Councillor Benney expressed the opinion that, as much as the application does not comply with LP3, it is a good site for development and it will be a nice high-quality development, which only get built in rural locations.  He feels that the proposal is infill as it has houses on either side and whilst he understands the connectivity issue, he feels if you live in a rural location you have to be able to drive and you would not buy a house in this location if you did not drive.  Councillor Benney expressed the view that having no footpath or streetlights would be great to him as it would mean there would be no people walking past his house and as much as there is a negative there is always a positive.  He feels that this would be a super home for somebody, with the committee rejecting an application today because it is not fit to live in, and, in his view, nice houses such as this should be approved as they grow the economy.  Councillor Benney expressed the opinion that the Council cannot keep turning down developments that bring quality and they should be supported.

·         Councillor Mrs French agreed with the comments of Councillor Benney, it is an infill site and a quality home.  She does not feel the property is too big and she would support it.

·         Councillor Topgood stated that he cannot see any reasons to refuse this application, it is a rural location and obviously people need cars to get to and from most rural locations and it will be a lovely house for someone to live in.

·         Councillor Miscandlon stated that he lives in a rural location, he has a bus come past his property once in the morning and once in the evening, which is not convenient meaning he has to use a car or motorbike, but it is a fact of life in rural locations that you are going to use a car.

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

Members do not support officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel the proposal would not be detrimental to the environment in this location.

(Councillor Sutton declared an interest in this application, by virtue of the agent being his nephew and that he knows the applicant very well, having socialised with her in the past and sits on a committee with them, and retired from the meeting for the duration of the discussion and voting thereon)