Issue - meetings

Application for erection of five dwellings.

Late items received after preparation of the main agenda:

Introduction:-

Following the publication of the committee report, the applicant has submitted the following amended plans: elevation plan; materials layout plan; and, landscaping plan. An artist's impression of the site entrance with the public right of way has also been submitted.

Consultations:-

The plans submitted are non-material minor amendments to the original plans submitted and so a re-consultation exercise is not required to take place.

Appraisal:-

The amended elevation and materials plan proposes to introduce render to the dwelling located on the corner plot (Plot 80). It is considered that this amendment would provide interest to this end unit which would become a focal point when entering the housing estate.

The amended plans also include a landscaping plan which proposes additional planting along the public right of way corridor and the introduction of a variety of species-rich plants. The landscaping proposed would soften the impact of the development on users of the public footpath to the benefit of the character of the surrounding area in accordance with Policies DM4 and DM10 of the SADMP and Policy H7 of the emerging DNP.

Recommendation:-

The recommendation contained in the Committee Report remains unaltered. The following conditions should be amended to read:

2.      The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the submitted application details, as follows:

Drgs no: 1026-AD-201A; 202C and 205B all received on 17 November 2020

Drgs no: PD-001-2; 002-1 and 002-2 all received on 17 November 2020

Drgs no: 1026-AD-204C; 1758-05a and PD-001-01A received on 2 February 2021

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory impact of the development to accord with Policies DM1 and DM10 of the adopted Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD.

9.      The dwellings hereby approved shall only be constructed from the materials as contained within approved Drg No: 1026-AD-204C.

Reason: To ensure that the development has a satisfactory external appearance in accordance with Policies DM10 of the SADMP (2016).

10.    Prior to the occupation of 20% of the dwellings hereby approved the landscaping scheme as shown on approved Drg no: C-1758-05a shall be implemented in full to the satisfaction in writing of the local planning authority. The soft landscaping scheme shall be maintained for a period of five years from the date of planting. During this period any trees or shrubs which die or are damaged, removed or seriously diseased shall be replaced by trees or shrubs of a similar size and species to those originally planted at which time shall be specified in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development has a satisfactory external appearance in accordance with Policies DM4 and DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD (2016).

Application for erection of five dwellings.

It was moved by Councillor R Allen and seconded by Councillor Findlay that permission be granted in accordance with the officer’s recommendation. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was LOST.

It was subsequently moved by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor Furlong that permission be refused for the following reason:

“The reduction of the open landscaped area, which was previously approved, brings built development closer to the settlement edge which reduces the role the landscaped area played in setting built form away from the boundary with the countryside and providing a transition from open countryside to the residential development. This openness was important to the design of the previously approved scheme which retained the public footpath through the landscaped area. Whilst the footpath remains, the public will no longer enjoy an open landscaped setting which is considered poor design and will be detrimental to the visual amenities of the area. It is therefore contrary to DM10 part e of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD 2016.”

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the abovementioned reasons.

Application for erection of five dwellings.

Application for erection of five dwellings.

It was moved by Councillor Findlay and seconded by Councillor Boothby that permission be granted subject to the conditions contained in the officer’s report.

It was subsequently moved by Councillor Sheppard-Bools and seconded by Councillor Walker that permission be refused due to being contrary to policy DM9 in relation to the footpath.

Being the first valid motion, the proposal to approve was put to the vote and LOST.

Following officer advice, Councillor Sheppard-Bools, with the agreement of Councillor Walker, withdrew the motion to refuse.

It was moved by Councillor Sheppard-Bools and seconded by Councillor Walker that the application be deferred for further consideration. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – the application be deferred.