Agenda item

S.73 Application - For the variation of Condition 3 on NP/DDD/0921/1053 at Chatsworth House, Chatsworth, Edensor (NP/DDD/0622/0760, ALN)

Minutes:

 

The report was introduced by the Area Team Manager and referenced the conditions originally set out at the Planning Committee in December 2020.

 

The following spoke under the Public Participation at Meetings Scheme:

 

·         Mr Ted Cadogan, Chief Operating Officer Chatsworth, Applicant

 

Members requested information from the speaker regarding the number of cars parked on the land below the Bastion Wall and if there were alternative locations that could be used. The speaker confirmed there were between 1,500 and 2,000 cars parked there on Bank Holidays and that there were alternative sites for parking but that the area below the Bastion Wall had grass protection laid and better drainage.

 

Members noted the concerns regarding the impact on the heritage landscape of allowing the overflow parking on more days and felt that the applicant had not supplied enough justification to support the application and that consideration should be given to sustainable transport alternatives.

 

A motion to refuse the application in line with Officer recommendation was moved and a request for Officers to work with the Chatsworth Estate as important partners within the National Park to send out a positive Sustainable Transport message.

 

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

 

 

RESOLVED:

 

The application was REFUSED for the following reasons:

 

1.

Chatsworth House and its registered park and garden are of the highest significance for their exceptional historic, architectural and archaeological interest.  An additional 34 days per calendar year of overflow parking over and above that which is currently permitted by the condition, in front of the principle elevation of Chatsworth House would lead to harm to the setting of the grade l listed building and would detract from the ability to appreciate a key iconic view of the house across the park for substantial periods, contrary to Core Strategy  policies GSP1, GSP3  and L3,  Development Management Policies DMC3, DMC5, DMC7 and DMC9 and advice in the National Planning Policy Guidance. The harm would not be outweighed by the public benefits of the scheme.

 

2.

The provision of substantial additional visitor car parking without the associated removal of inappropriately parked vehicles, at an appropriate level, is contrary to Core Strategy policies T1 and T7 and Development Management Plan policy DMT7.

 

Supporting documents: