Erection of a single dwelling and garage for occupation by site manager.

The Committee was minded to grant planning permission, contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation, and authorised officers to do so subject to a positive Habitat Regulations Assessment, and no other material considerations or changes in policy arising, and a S106 agreement tying both the existing accommodation and the proposed dwelling to the business.

(Erection of a single dwelling and garage for occupation by site manager.)

The Senior Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr S Bozward, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor Harrington, spoke on the application.

He made the following principal comments:

·        The application hinged on the need for the applicant to have accommodation on site and what quality of accommodation was required.

·        The site provided local employment for many young people in the summer.  It provided the only pub and café in the area. It was well-run.

·        The applicant was not a publican but his accommodation was within the pub with rented accommodation above.  His responsibilities for the site meant he had to be there from 6am until late at night.  His presence on site was essential.  Whilst, if the new dwelling some 50m away was approved, he may well still be called upon by those using the site, the quality of life for him and in particular his partner would be improved.

·        He considered there was a need for the applicant to have the proposed house and to provide it would be compliant with policy RA4.  However, the property should be tied to the business.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

·        There were no objections to the proposal and 25 letters in support.

·        The proposed site for the dwelling was not in use and unkempt, out of character with the rest of the site.  The proposal would round off the development. 

·        There was an essential functional need.  The applicant’s existing accommodation on site was inadequate.  The proposal was compliant with policy RA4.

·        It was suggested that, if approved, consideration should be given to seeking for the dwelling, which would be in the open countryside, to be of exceptional quality or innovative design.

The Lead Development Manager commented that officers had concluded that the existing accommodation enabled the site to be appropriately managed.  This was a matter of judgment.  If the Committee was minded to approve the application, authority to grant planning permission would need to be delegated to officers subject to a positive Habitat Regulations Assessment and no other material considerations or changes in policy arising.  A S106 agreement tying both the existing and proposed accommodation to the business should also be required.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He had no additional comment.

Councillor Hunt proposed and Councillor Millmore seconded a motion that the Committee be minded to grant planning permission, subject to a positive Habitat Regulations Assessment and no other material considerations or changes in policy arising, and completion of a S106 agreement tying both the existing accommodation and the proposed new dwelling to the business, on the grounds that the proposal was compliant with NDP policies LG1, LG2 and LG6 and CS policies RA2 and SD1, and appropriate delegated authority to grant planning permission be given to officers.

The motion was carried unanimously with 15 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions. 

RESOLVED:

That      (a)     the Committee was minded to grant planning permission, subject to a positive Habitat Regulations Assessment, and no other material considerations or changes in policy arising, and completion of a S106 agreement tying both the existing accommodation and the proposed new dwelling to the business,on the grounds that the proposal was compliant with NDP policies LG1, LG2 and LG6 and CS policies RA2 and SD1; and

              (b)     subject to (a) above, the Assistant Director, Regulatory, Planning and Waste be authorised accordingly to grant planning permission and officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to officers authorised to detail the reasons put forward for approval by the committee and attach any conditions considered necessary by officers.

(The meeting adjourned between 12.13 to 12.25 am.)