Agenda item

The Planning Officer gave the following updates to the report:

·         Paragraph 113 should read “the proposed development would result in”, i.e. the word “not“ should be removed.

·         To be consistent with Paragraph 140 by amending reason 2 of the recommendation to add “harm to the setting of the listed building”

·         There is a current new application submitted by a Housing Association for a scheme of 23 affordable houses on a nearby site in the village

·         That a representation has been received from Natural England who have made no objections and will leave it to the specialised Officer in accordance with Policy.

The Planning Officer introduced the report outlining the reasons for refusal as set out in the report.

The following addressed the Committee under the Public Participations at Meetings Scheme:

·         Mr Robert Hopkins, Applicant - via a recorded video message.

Members discussed concerns regarding excessive shade, potential damage to the protected trees and other viable uses for the site.

A motion to refuse the application in accordance with the Officer recommendation as amended was moved and seconded, and a vote was taken and carried.

RESOLVED

The application was REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.    Significant harm to TPO protected trees from the construction of houses within the root protection areas and underneath canopies resulting in immediate damage to remaining protected trees contrary to Policies DMC13, GSP1-3 &L1. 

This would be highly likely to result in dieback, or death of the trees along with likely significant pressure from future residents for removal or lopping of trees if the development were to proceed.  

2.    The proposed layout and the design of the houses, especially the wide gable steep roof pitch does not adequately reflect the established pattern of development in the locality and would harm the valued character and appearance of the locally built environment and the streetscene contrary to Policies GSP1-3 & DMC3 and cause harm to the setting of the listed building and be contrary to Policies DMC 5, 7 and 8.