Agenda item

The Business Manager gave a presentation on the application to the Committee.

 

Public Speaker, Objector – Spoke on:

·       Loss of MG5 Grassland

·       Existing fields provide biodiversity

·       Objector’ QC opinion

 

Public Speaker, Objector – Spoke on:

·       Applicant have not satisfied reasons for deferment

·       Lack of recent grassland survey

·       Objections from Town Council

·       Application does not compliment landscape

·       Tree officer opposed to application

 

 

Public Speaker, Supporter – Spoke on:

·       Site allocated for development

·       Principle of development is established

·       Outline permission already granted

·       QC opinion regarding grassland

·       Applicant will preserve as much grassland as possible

·       High quality housing with area of natural play

 

Comments from Councillors included:

·       Objections from Town Council

·       Declaration of climate emergency

·       Objectors QC provides reasons for refusal

·       MG5 grassland not significantly addressed by planning inspector

·       QC opinions should be given equal merit

·       Objectors QC opinion were not disregarded but summarised in the late update sheet

·       Landscape element of application

·       Grassland would be at risk of becoming overgrown if not cut

·       Grassland would need to become SSSI for protection

·       Inspector dealt with all matters during planning inspection

·       Ecology wasn’t raised during outline planning permission at committee

·       Consideration of the neighbourhood plan

·       Concerns about bat population

·       Change of use mitigations

·       Drainage issues

·       Bat, bird, and bee boxes are needed

·       Parking issues

·       Refuse storage needs to be enforced

·       Solar panels should be used

·       Parking cannot be enforced on private drive

·       Bovey Tracey plan is a material condition

·       Needs to comply with policy LE4

·       Ecological concerns should’ve been raised earlier

 

The Business Manager spoke on:

·       Report represents professional opinion from both planning and legal perspectives

·       Reasons of refusal would be difficult to support

·       Neighbourhood Plan and NPPF should be used for reasons for refusal

·       The emerging Bovey Tracey plan was a material consideration but with limited weight attached

·       Solar panels are not mandated

·       Details of carbon reduction measures were included.

 

The Legal Officer spoke on:

·       Members should consider both QC opinions on balance

 

 

It was proposed by Councillor Kerswell and seconded by Councillor MacGregor that permission be refused for the reasons set out by the Town Council.

 

A vote was taken – see attached. The vote was lost.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Haines and seconded by Councillor Goodman-Bradbury that permission be granted as set out in the report.

 

A vote was taken – see attached. The vote was lost.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Kerswell and seconded by Councillor MacGregor that permission be refused for the reasons set out by the Town Council as well as the landscaping.

 

A vote was taken – see attached.

 

Resolved

 

That permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.     Loss of MG5 grassland

2.     Lack of solar panels

3.     Contrary to policy H3 - Provision of discrete cycle storage/ refuse and recycling storage that is both secure and aesthetically pleasing

4.     Contrary to policy H4 - developments of above 10 units to be designed to maximise walking and cycling and to encourage health benefits which arise from access to green space

5.     Loss of landscape

 

Note: The decision to refuse the application was against officer recommendation. The Committee considered this application unacceptable for the reasons below.

 

Statement of Reason

The Committee considered this application unacceptable due to the following reasons

 

1.     Loss of MG5 grassland

2.     Lack of solar panels

3.     Contrary to policy H3 - Provision of discrete cycle storage/ refuse and recycling storage that is both secure and aesthetically pleasing

4.     Contrary to policy H4 - developments of above 10 units to be designed to maximise walking and cycling and to encourage health benefits which arise from access to green space

5.     Loss of landscape