Agenda item

Full Application - Proposed erection of one local needs home on land adjacent to Sports Field, Taddington (NP/DDD/0221/0150 P9029/SC)



Cllr P Brady had declared a prejudicial interest for this item as Chair of Taddington Parish Council, so left the meeting room and didn’t take part in any discussion.


The Chair and Vice Chair had visited the site the previous day.


The Planning Officer presented the report and informed Members that although the site was just outside the Taddington Conservation Area (CA), the CA did run adjacent to the south and western sides of the development site, and that there had also been concerns raised by the Highway Authority regarding the potential conflict of users on the unadopted lane which was also a public footpath.


The other fundamental issue was  that although the applicant met the housing need qualification, the proposed house was significantly larger than what was supported by policy for a single person dwelling.


The following made representations to  the Committee under the Public Participation at meetings scheme:


·           Mr Davidson-Hawley, Applicant – video statement


Cllr Brady had initially requested to speak on this item but had subsequently withdrawn his request.


Although Members had sympathy with the applicant, the highways concerns had to be taken into account,  together with the size of the proposed development, which would be too large to meet the applicant’s identified housing need for an affordable local needs dwelling. Members discussed the need to consider affordable housing in more detail in conjunction with the Local Plan Review and the need for appropriate housing for young families to maintain the viability and sustainability of villages within the Park.


A motion to refuse the application in accordance with Officer recommendation was put to the vote and carried.


Cllr Potter asked that her vote against the recommendation be recorded.




That the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:



The proposed dwelling house is significantly larger than the size justified by the identified housing need. The proposed house would therefore not meet an identified need for affordable local needs housing and therefore as a result the proposal is contrary to policy DMH1.



The substandard visibility and the intensification of use arising from the proposed development would adversely affect highway safety. Therefore contrary to policy DMT3 and guidance within Para: 109 of the NPPF.





Supporting documents: