Erection of 2 dwellings and associated garaging and revised vehicular access for planning approval 180075/F.

The application was approved in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

(Erection of 2 dwellings and associated garaging and  revised vehicular access for planning approval 180075/F.)

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.

It was noted that, as reported in the update, Garway Parish Council had confirmed that they no longer objected to the proposal.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs J Joseph, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application.

The local ward member, Councillor DG Harlow, was unable to attend the meeting.  The Chairperson read out a statement he had submitted.

The statement contained the following principal comments:

·        The only way for rural villages such as Garway to survive was to allow some development. Garway was identified as a settlement in the Core strategy.  It had a popular primary school, a public house and a garage. In many ways it was an excellent place for development.

·        His principal concern related to the type of house being proposed.  Garway needed affordable homes, for young families looking for their first property.  Whilst the application was for two semi-detached properties they were unlikely to be “affordable”. The five dwellings adjoining were larger and better described as ‘executive’.

·        The proposed development was outside the settlement boundary in the emerging Neighbourhood Development Plan. The site was on the very edge of what might be considered Garway village.

·        In relation to landscaping he requested that conditions be applied to safeguard the stunning views particularly from the adjacent public right of way.

·        If the application had been for affordable houses he would not have requested that it be considered by the Committee.  He was concerned the proposal would encourage an increasingly aged population to move to the county’s rural villages.  That demographic was unlikely to support the local services that it was hoped to retain.

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

·        It was asked whether a footpath proposed on the site could be designated as a public right of way as recommended by the Ramblers Association at the end of their representations set out at paragraph 5.2 of the report.

The Development Manager commented that a public right of way existed and was not materially affected by the development.  However, whilst a condition would not be appropriate, the proposal in paragraph 5.2 could be explored with the applicant.

·        It was asked whether a mature sycamore tree referenced in the Conservation Manager (Arboraculturist’s) comments at paragraph 4.5 of the report could be protected with a tree preservation order.  Clarification was also sought on the future management of that area.

The Development Manager commented that granting planning permission would ensure some protection for the tree.  The possibility of a tree preservation order could be explored.

·        The proposal adjoined a previously approved scheme for five dwellings.

·        It was unfortunate that the developments did not include affordable housing as some of the representations  ...  view the full minutes text for item 130