Agenda item

The Committee considered the report of the Deputy Chief Executive, which sought the views of Members to additional information received in connection with an appeal against a previous committee decision to refuse the change of use of scrubland for the siting of eight static mobile homes for gypsy travellers and reduce ground levels to 10.5m AOD at the site.

This application was considered by the Planning Committee on 25 January 2017 when Members resolved to refuse planning permission on the grounds of flood risk.  The applicant had appealed against the refusal of planning permission and an Informal Hearing was due to take place on 27 February 2018.  Within the appeal submission, additional information had been submitted in relation to the proposed occupiers of the site that was not before Members when they came to their decision, which represented further material evidence that could have been weighed in the balance in the consideration process.  The additional personal circumstances detail set out within their appeal documentation was included within the report.

The Committee was informed that had this information been presented with the original application, officers would have likely recommended a personal permission be granted for a temporary period of three years.  In the light of this additional material information that had been received, Members were asked to consider whether this would be likely to affect their resolution on this proposal if the matter were to come before them again, for determination.  Members were also informed that the flood evacuation plan was robust and was as up to date as it could be, bearing in mind constraints of the length of the Tolney Lane access, the flooding issues (including parts of the access flooding first) and level of warning offered depending on the severity of an event. A vote was taken to continue to defend the appeal on the basis that any consent, even temporary, would be unacceptable. This was lost by a vote of four votes for and eight votes against.

Members considered the report and resolved that if the additional information had been before them previously they would have been minded to have approved the application subject to a personal and temporary consent for a period of three years.  The appeal therefore should be fought on the basis that any permission granted on appeal should be both temporary and personal.  It should be made clear that this decision had been taken as soon as it reasonably could have been with Members following its receipt as part of the appellants appeal proposals.

The Environment Agency should also be advised that the Council’s position at the hearing was that there is significant flood risk, but that a temporary permission was acceptable currently, subject to robust planning conditions and flood warden responsibilities. If the Environment Agency wanted to argue that permission should be resisted on any basis, including temporary, it would be for them to promote and would not form part of this authority’s case.

AGREED (unanimously) that:

If the additional information had been before the Planning Committee previously Members would have been minded to approve the application subject to a personal and temporary consent for a period of three years, and subject to robust flood evacuation and warden requirements, similar to those previously accepted, such as at Green Park.  The appeal therefore should be fought on the basis that any permission granted on appeal should be temporary and personal.  It should be made clear that this decision had been taken as soon as it reasonably could have been with Members following its receipt as part of the appellants appeal proposals.

The Environment Agency should also be advised that the Council’s position at the hearing was that there is flood risk, but until alternative sites were found, a temporary permission, with appropriate safeguards secured by condition, was acceptable. If the Environment Agency wanted to argue that any permission should be resisted it would be for them to argue that at the hearing.

(Councillor J. Lee left the meeting at this point).