0366/17 Land adjacent No 17, Brockford Road, Mendlesham IP14 5SG
Minutes:
schedule of planning applications
Report NA/08/17
In accordance with the Council’s procedure for public speaking on planning applications a representation was made as detailed below:
Planning Application Number |
Representations from |
|
|
0366/17 |
Michael Exley (Parish Council) Phil Cobbold (Agent) |
Item 1
Application Number: 0366/17
Proposal: Outline planning permission sought for the erection of two detached dwellings
Site Location: MENDLESHAM – Land adjacent No 17, Brockford Road, IP14 5SG
Applicant: Honeycroft Properties
The Senior Planning Officer presented the application and tabled the Member request to refer the application to Committee. Members queried the NPPF and recently approved Mendlesham Neighbourhood Plan in relation to the Council’s lack of a five year land supply. The Officer responded that the NPPF Paragraph 14 should be given greater weight as the Council did not have a five year land supply. In response to further questions the Officer responded that the site had not been identified as a development site in the Mendlesham Neighbourhood Plan.
Michael Exley, Mendlesham Parish Council, said that in 1998 the site was designated as a Visual Important Open Space (VIOS) and was also a greenfield site. The Parish Council believed that Policy SB3 protected the VIOS and it was important that this site was not lost to development, as it’s amenity value added character to the approach to the village and its historical Grade One listed church. The site was a traditional green meadow and Mr Exley said that the development of two bungalows at the gateway to Mendlesham would not only obscure the VIOS but would also add to the urbanisation of the approach to the village. He said by adopting the Neighbourhood Plan it was hoped that the village would maintain its rural character
Phil Cobbold, the Agent, said that the Local Plan and Mendlesham Neighbourhood Plan policies were out of date in relation to VIOS sites. Therefore the application had to be considered solely on its benefits and if these outweighed the harm it should be approved. He felt that the development would benefit the village both economically and socially and that sustainability was achieved by its accessibility to local facilities and to public transport.
Councillor Andrew Stringer, Ward Member, said the application should be considered in relation to the Mendlesham Neighbourhood Plan and whether the site had been allocated for development or not. In 2003 when sites were requested the Parish Council allocated two sites for development, both of which had been brought forward. The application site would have had to be added retrospectively, which was not possible and this circumstance had not been tested on appeal. Mr Stringer felt that the development would have a significant visual impact on the VIOS and on the approach to the village from Brockford Lane.
Members questioned Officers on various issues, including the Neighbourhood Plan and its relationship to the five year land supply.
Members debated the visual impact of the proposed development on the VIOS and the setting of the church. Some Members felt that single storey dwellings would not have a significant impact on the approach to the village and the setting of the church, and that the benefits of a the development outweighed the impact. Other Members felt the Mendlesham Neighbour Plan should carry more weight when considering the application. The visual and environmental impacts were raised and the loss of part of the meadow was discussed. Some Members felt that the application had to be considered in terms of the unique setting of the site, due to it being a VIOS and a gateway to Mendlesham.
A motion to approve the proposal subject to additional conditions was proposed and seconded. The vote was tied 5 votes to 5.
By the Chairman’s casting vote the motion fell.
A motion to refuse the application as contrary to Mid Suffolk Local Plan 1998 Policies SB3, GP1, H13, H7, Mid Suffolk Core Strategy Policy CS5, Mendlesham Neighbourhood Plan 2017 Policies MP10 and NPPF including paragraphs 60 and 64 was moved.
By 6 votes to 4
Decision – Application Refused
1. The development would, if approved result in the erosion of the character and appearance of the area and have a harmful impact, as it would develop part of the Visually Important Open Space (VIOS) designated harming land’s contribution, in an undeveloped form, to the distinctiveness of its setting and views into the village. The economic and social benefits are not considered to outweigh this harm. Accordingly, the development is considered contrary to Mid Suffolk Local Plan 1998 policies SB3, GP1, H13, H7, Mid Suffolk Core Strategy Policy CS5, Mendlesham Neighbourhood Plan 2017 policies MP10 and NPPF including paragraphs 60 and 64.
Supporting documents: