Decision details

The Head of Law reminded the Committee that as Cllr D Chapman had declared a personal, prejudicial interest in this application he would address the Committee as the first speaker under public participation and then leave the meeting.

Councillor P Brady declared a personal interest as he was a friend of one of the speakers and an acquaintance of two others.

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

The Director Planning highlighted the policy issues relating to the application and the Planning Officer introduced aspects of the application. The introduction included details of the Viability Statement provided by the developer in support of the application. It was noted that, due to the flooding measures required by the Environment Agency, if approved the permission could not be implemented until the developer had received and implemented planning approval for a swale.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         Cllr David Chapman, Authority Member and Derbyshire Dales District Councillor (As he had declared a personal, prejudicial interest he left the meeting immediately after speaking)

·         Mr Richard Gregory, Objector

·         Mr Ron Critchlow, Objector

·         Mr Geoff Howden, Objector

·         Liz Broomhead, MBE, Objector

·         Robert Gregory, Objector

·         Mr John Dean, Objector

·         Mr C R Dullage, Objector

·         Mrs Julie Critchlow, Objector

·         Cllr David Annat, Chair of Hartington Parish Council, Objector

·         Mr Andrew Wood, Friends of the Peak District, Objector

·         Alison Clamp, Peak District Rural Housing Association

·         Isabel Frenzel, DDDC Rural Housing Enabler

·         Rob Cogings, DDDC Head of Housing

·         Mr Teifion Salisbury on behalf of the Applicant

Following the public speakers Cllr Mrs K Potter declared a personal interest as a supporter of CPRE/Friends of the Peak District.

During questions and debate the Committee discussed in detail issues relating to viability, community benefit and the provision of affordable housing. As part of the discussion it was suggested that further information on issues relating to affordable housing should be considered at the 2015 Parishes Day later in the year.

A motion to refuse the application was moved, seconded, put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED:

To REFUSE the application for the following reasons:

1.            The public benefits of allowing permission for the current application would not amount to the exceptional circumstances necessary to justify a major development in the National Park.

2.         By virtue of its size and scale and by virtue of the design, siting layout and landscape design for the development, the proposed development would not be in keeping with local building traditions and would be insensitive to the locally distinctive character landscape setting and the settlements overall pattern of development and would therefore be contrary to a range  of development policies.

3.         The development does not fully take into account the energy hierarchy by reducing the need for energy and lack of energy saving measures and renewables and therefore it will not achieve the highest possible standards of carbon reductions or sustainable development contrary to CC1 of the core strategy.