Agenda item

Site Visit: 10.40am

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager – Planning Development, which sought permission in principle for a residential development of up to a maximum of two dwellings and a minimum of one.

A site visit had taken place prior to the commencement of the Planning Committee for Members, for the following reasons:

(i)                 There were particular site factors which were significant in terms of the weight attached to them relative to other factors if they would be difficult to assess in the absence of a site inspection; and

(iii)       The impact of the proposed development was difficult to visualise.

A Schedule of Communication was circulated prior to the meeting which detailed correspondence received from the following: Ms Quibell (former owner of site); Spalford Parish Meeting; and Mrs Cassells.

Members considered the presentation from the Planning Case Officer, which included photographs and plans of the proposed development.

Members considered the application, and it was commented that Spalford was an unsustainable location as it was a hamlet, with no services other than an on-demand bus service.  The proposed development would be surrounded by flood zone 2 & 3.  In terms of need, five dwellings and two barn conversions had recently been approved.  This was considered a development too far.  The Planning Officer confirmed regarding a Member comment that the trees had already been felled on site, the trees were not protected and the owner had been permitted to remove them.  Members raised concern that the removal of the trees would only exacerbate the flooding problem.  The Senior Planning Officer advised in answer to a Member question that the access to the North which was viewed at the site visit, would not be allowed as it was outside the redline on the application plan.  Access would be allowed through flood zone 2, which would need a sequential test, which had been undertaken by the applicant and deemed acceptable.  The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that the previous application had been refused at appeal on the grounds of the sequential test.

A vote was taken for approval and lost with 1 vote For and 12 Votes Against.

AGREED                       Moved Councillor L Dales and Seconded Councillor D Moore                                   (with 12 votes For, 1 vote Against) that contrary to Officer                                               recommendation Permission in Principle be refused for the                             following reasons:

(i)                   Policy SP3 & DM12;

(ii)                 Surrounded by flood zone 2 & 3;

(iii)               Unsustainable location; and

(iv)               Out of character with the area.

In accordance with paragraph 18.5 of the Planning Protocol, as the motion was against Officer recommendation, a recorded vote was taken.

The Planning Committee Chair indicated that the meeting duration of an additional one hour had expired therefore a motion was moved by the Chair and agreed by Members to continue the meeting for a further hour.