At the Planning Committee meeting on 12th August 2020, Members advised that they were minded to refuse the above application and invited an implications report for further consideration.
Minutes:
At the Planning Committee meeting on 12 August 2020, Members advised that they were minded to refuse the above application and invited an implications report for further consideration. The Committee therefore had before it a *report of the Head of Planning, Economy and Regeneration setting out the implications of refusal.
The Area Team Leader outlined the contents of the report stating that as outlined within the minute of the previous meeting, Committee Members gave consideration to a number of matters which included the desire of the applicant to live on site, the response from statutory consultees, visibility splay requirements and the need for the removal of hedgerow and rights of the applicant to cut back vegetation/hedgebank, the actual numbers of people who would live on site, concerns over safety for occupiers from various risks such as through falling trees and caravans falling over during high winds, accessibility of the site during snowy conditions, flooding concerns of the site with associated impacts on drainage and children’s play area.
Members of Planning Committee had therefore resolved that they were minded to refuse this application, deferring the application for consideration of an implications report to consider reasons for refusal to include:
· Policy Planning for Traveller Sites - Section 14. When assessing the suitability of sites in rural or semi-rural settings, local planning authorities should ensure that the scale of such sites does not dominate the nearest settled community.
· Policy DM7 - A, Space for children’s Play
· Policy DM7 - C, unacceptable landscape or ecological impact
· Policy DM7 - E, safe and convenient access to local facilities.
· Policy DM2 - High quality design
· Policy DM2 - Positive contribution to local character including any heritage or biodiversity assets and the setting of heritage assets
· Policy DM2 - Visually attractive places that are well integrated with surrounding buildings, streets and landscapes
· Policy DM2 - Appropriate drainage including sustainable drainage systems
As such three reasons for refusal had been formed to cover the above concerns with correct reference made to Policy DM1 rather than DM2.
He then provided by way of presentation the layout of the site and addressed the following detail:
The applicant sought planning permission for the material change of use of agricultural land to residential use for a gypsy and traveller family. The proposal would involve the siting of a static caravan; parking for two touring caravans; the siting of a storage shed and car parking area; landscaping works, including tree planting and the creation of a landscaped bank; and works to create a safe access onto the public highway.
The site comprised an area of mostly open grassland, including an area surfaced with loose material, on which two touring caravans were currently being kept (these would be moved on site to the position shown on the layout plan and form part of any planning permission issued), along with a wooden storage structure. The site’s western, northern, and eastern boundaries adjoined open fields in agricultural use. The southern boundary ... view the full minutes text for item 64