Agenda and draft minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 14 January 2026.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 14^th January 2026 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor Alan Macro declared an interest in Agenda Item 4(1) by virtue of the fact that the objector to the application had been his family doctor for many years. He reported that, as his interest was a personal or an other registrable interest, but not a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to continue as Chairman of the meeting and to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

(Note: The Chairman, with the consent of the Committee, reserves the right to alter the order of business on this agenda based on public interest and participation in individual applications).

1.      The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 25/009/FUL in respect of the erection of two standalone supported living units, staff facility, elevational external and internal alterations to the existing activities building and conversion to a self-catering unit associated with the existing care facility.

2.      Ms Emma Nutchey introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main report.

3.      The Chairman asked Paul Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application and he raised the following points:

·       The proposed two units were expected to generate approximately three to four additional vehicle movements in, and three to four vehicle movements out of the site per day.

·       Concerns regarding the maintenance of the bridleway were acknowledged, however, it was explained that maintenance was covered under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

·       The bridleway would continue to be maintained as it was currently, to a standard appropriate to serve existing dwellings and the proposed development.

·       The increase in vehicle movements was not considered sufficient to warrant a highways objection and adequate car parking already existed within the site and was not expected to change. On this basis, highways officers raised no objection to the planning application.

4.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr James Bywater, objector, and Mr James Smith, agent (Ridge and Partners), addressed the Committee on this application.

Objector Representation

5.      Mr Bywater addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording: Eastern Area Planning Committee - Recording

Member Questions to the Objector

6.      Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       The foundations of the bridleway along the section the application referred to was an unmade, stone hoggin surface. It was noted that further along its length the surface became mud, grass and clay. The hard?surfaced section was about two metres wide, allowing access for only one vehicle at a time. Long ruts and potholes regularly formed.

·       It was confirmed that the bridleway was the sole access to the farm at the northern end of the site and continued north to Stanford Dingley. It was explained that while access was mainly by road vehicles, agricultural vehicles including tractors and trailers used the bridleway during hay?making and apple?picking periods.

·       In planning terms, it was felt the proposal represented an excessive increase in the footprint and level of accommodation at Appletrees. The site was described as having evolved gradually from a former fruit farm into supported accommodation for young adults with difficulties.There were no issues with the existing use and a positive relationship had been maintained over many years.

Agent Representation

7.      Mr Smith addressed the Committee. This representation can be viewed on the recording: Eastern Area Planning Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.(1)