Agenda and minutes

The Minutes of the meeting held on 12 March 2014 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman subject to the inclusion of the following statement: decommissioning the solar panels would be the responsibility of the land owner.

There were no declarations of interest received.

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 14/00233/FUL in respect of an application to remove Class E from condition 4 of approved application 13/02394/HOUSE.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Andrew Robinson, applicant, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Robinson in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·                    He reminded the Committee that application 13/02394/HOUSE considered the development of the dwelling only. Further development onsite was not directly considered.

·                    The removal of permitted development rights failed to consider the introduction of any modest sized outhouses, the condition should only be included under exceptional circumstances.

·                    The property was already disproportionate in size when compared to its original state; therefore, ENV24 guidance was not applicable.

·                    As set out in the National Planning Guidance (NPG) any proposed condition that failed to meet the six tests should not be used.

·                    The use of restricting Class E development within condition 4 was thought to be neither necessary or fair and unreasonable. It was unlikely that application 13/01394/HOUSE was approved solely on the basis that it included condition 4; which reinforced the view that it was not necessary.

·                    It was not fair or reasonable to restrict Class E development of a family home and the opportunity to improve the site.

Councillor Richard Crumly asked whether Mr Robinson had considered appealing the decision made in November 2013 against application 13/01394/HOUSE. Mr Robinson advised that he had not on the basis that he planned to submit the current application instead.

Councillor Alan Law asked what Mr Robinson planned to build if the condition was removed. Mr Robinson advised that he was unsure at this stage; he wanted to have the flexibility to decide without passing each idea through the planning process.

Councillor Graham Pask stated that he had visited the site twice, he sympathised with the applicant as the current development was unattractive and could benefit from improvements.

Councillor Pask acknowledged that the site was unlikely to be overdeveloped under its current ownership; however, he was concerned that if the condition was lifted and the site was sold then it could be open to excessive development.

Councillor Pask supported the Officer’s recommendation.

In response, Councillor Law explained that his main concern would not be overdevelopment but rather the appropriateness of any future development. Councillor Law reminded the Committee that the application was refused at first due to concerns regarding the appropriateness of the proposed development. The subsequent application was approved due to the Committees increased confidence on the basis that the application included permitted development rights.

Councillor Law also supported the Officer’s recommendation.

Councillor Alan Macro was concerned that a variety of buildings could be allowed on site if the development of Class E buildings was permitted.  Councillor Macro was supportive of Officers’ recommendations and stated that if the applicant wanted to develop then he would have an opportunity to request permission by submitting a planning application.

Councillor Tony Linden recommended acceptance of Officers’ recommendations to refuse planning permission. The recommendation was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.(1)

A date of 16 April March 2014 at 9.30am was agreed for site visits if necessary. This was in advance of the next Eastern Area Planning Committee scheduled for 24 April 2014.