Issue - meetings

Application for proposed residential development of up to 85 dwellings alongside associated site infrastructure and open space (outline application – all matters reserved except for the means of access).

Late items received after preparation of main agenda:

Recommendation:-

1.1.        Following the publication of the report condition 24 has since been amended. The amended condition reads as follows;

“No development shall take place (including ground works or vegetation clearance) until a Biodiversity Net Gain Plan (the Plan) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall be based on the submitted Biodiversity Net Gain metric spreadsheet (Sam Weston 05/05/2022) and shall provide a net gain on the reported baseline habitat loss. The Plan shall include the following details:

a) Location plan of the area(s) to be used for Biodiversity Net Gain;

b) Description of existing habitats on and off site;

c) Description of planned habitat creation/enhancement, including species;

d) Baseline habitat data used to inform metric;

e) Habitat creation/enhancement plans used to inform metric;

f) Timetable for implementation of habitat creation/enhancement;

g) Habitat management and monitoring plan including timetable for management routines and reviews, and strategy for any remedial measures, if and when required;

h) Mechanism for securing the implementation of the biodiversity off-setting and its maintenance/management for a period of 30 years in accordance with details approved in the Plan.

The Plan shall be supported by up to-date Biodiversity Net Gain metric calculations for both the application site and the site for off-setting using the latest DEFRA version of the metric. The Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.”

1.2.        No further late items have been received.

Application for residential development of up to 85 dwellings alongside associated site infrastructure and open space (outline application – all matters reserved except for the means of access).

An objector spoke on this application.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, members felt that

·         The application proposed development in the countryside. The development would not protect the intrincic value, beauty and open character of this countryside location and was therefore contrary to policy DM4 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD 2016 and Policy 1 of the Burbage Neighbourhood Plan

·         The development would create an increase in vehicular movements along Lychgate Lane, which would result in the development having a severe impact on highway safety on nearby junctions in Burbage and Aston Flamville and was therefore contrary to policy DM17 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD 2016.

It was moved by Councillor Walker and seconded by Councillor Flemming that permission be refused for these reasons. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was:

RESOLVED – permission be refused due to being contrary to policies DM4 and DM17 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD and policy 1 of the Burbage Neighbourhood plan, for the abovementioned reasons.