Outline application (access, layout for approval) for mixed residential development; formation of a vehicular access and associated infrastructure (revised scheme).

In accordance with his declaration at Minute No. 112, Councillor Andrew Bannerman left the room during consideration of this item.

The Area Planning Manager introduced the application and with reference to the drawings displayed, drew Members’ attention to the location and indicative layout.

Members had undertaken a site visit that morning and had viewed the site and assessed the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area. 

In accordance with the Local Protocol for Councillors and Officers dealing with Regulatory Matters (Part 5, Paragraph 15.1) Councillor David Roberts, as local Ward Councillor, made a statement and then left the room, took no part in the debate and did not vote on this item.  He did not return to the meeting.  During his statement, the following points were raised:

·         The cumulative effect of this proposal and previously granted permissions on a small village with minimal services would not be sustainable.

Mr I Hutchinson, representing Montford Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees. 

Mr S Taylor, the agent, spoke for the proposal in accordance with the Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees.

In response to a question from Members, Mr Hutchinson provided clarification on the existing number of houses in Montford Parish and the number of dwellings that had recently been granted permission.

In the ensuing debate, Members considered the submitted plans and noted the comments of all speakers and the position to date with regard to the emerging Site Allocations and Management Development Plan.  In response to comments, the Area Planning Manager drew Members’ attention to a recent appeal for 35 dwellings which had been dismissed because of the lack of a mechanism to secure the provision of affordable housing.  He reiterated that the Inspector had found that the proposal would not have an adverse impact upon the economic viability of the local area by taking high grade agricultural land out of production and although the proposal would lead to an economic loss in terms of the site no longer being actively farmed, this would not be significant and would be outweighed by the economic benefits associated with the scheme.  He cautioned against citing backland development as a reason for refusal.

RESOLVED:

That, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

·         The proposed development, by virtue of its location and scale would, in combination with current valid planning permissions and resolutions to grant permission for Montford Bridge, cumulatively result in development harmful to the rural character of the area and the nature of the settlement; and

·         As such the adverse impacts of granting permission are considered to significantly and demonstrably outweigh any benefits when assessed against the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework taken as a whole, the aims and requirements of the emerging Site Allocation and Management Development Plan and policy MD3 and is therefore not considered to constitute sustainable development.

(At this juncture, Councillor Tudor Bebb left the meeting and did not return.)