Decision details

It was noted that some Members had visited the site on the previous day.

The Planning officer reported that a letter had been received from the Agent, Mr D Sutherland, and this was summarised for the Committee.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         Mr M Otter, Applicant.

In response to Members’ queries the Planning officer stated that some development on the site for enhancement would be acceptable but the proposal submitted was a poor design and did not provide a justification for an exception to policy.

Members were supportive of some development on the site but with better design as an exceptional design would be required to justify an exception to policy, together with the enhancement such a scheme could achieve.  The recommendation for refusal was amended in the third paragraph from ‘any approval of the proposed development would represent unsustainable development’ to ‘approval of the proposed development would represent unsustainable development’.

The recommendation for refusal as amended was moved, seconded, voted on and carried.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED for the following reason:

1. The application site is located in the open countryside within the National Park.  The Authority’s Core Strategy takes forward the policy approach that it is not appropriate to permit new housing simply in response to the significant market demand to live in its sought after environment. In common with the National Planning Policy Framework, the Authority’s polices therefore do not make provision for housing other than in exceptional circumstances which in the open countryside would be where housing provides for key rural workers or where housing is required to achieve conservation or enhancement of valued vernacular or listed buildings.

The benefits of the proposed re-development of the application site will be limited because the proposed development would facilitate the conversion and retention a substantial existing modern industrial building on an isolated site and therefore the proposed development would continue to be read as an isolated and incongruous feature which would not reflect, respect or enhance the valued characteristics of the National Park. The benefits of the proposed development therefore would not outweigh the strong presumption against the creation of new housing in unsustainable locations within the National Park in the development plan or the National Planning Policy Framework.

Therefore it is considered that approval of the proposed development would

represent unsustainable development which would have a harmful impact upon the valued characteristics of the National Park contrary to Core Strategy policies GSP1, GSP2, GSP3, DS1, L1, L3, CC1 and HC1 and saved Local Plan policies LC4, LC5, LH1 and LH2 and the National Planning Policy Framework.