Resolution status:Carried
That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to REFUSE Planning Permission based on the following reasons:
1. The proposal is in a countryside location where the development of a new dwelling would not materially enhance or maintain the vitality of the rural community. Future occupants will, moreover, be likely to be reliant upon the private car to access services, facilities and employment. The District Council has an evidenced supply of land for housing in excess of 9 years and has taken steps to boost significantly the supply of homes in sustainable locations.
On this basis the proposal would not promote sustainable development and would be contrary to the adopted policies of the development plan which seek to direct the majority of new development to towns and key service centres listed in the Core Strategy 2008 with some provision to meet local needs in primary and secondary villages under policy CS1. In the countryside development is to be restricted having regard to policy CS2 and it is considered that in the circumstances of this application the direction of new housing development to more sustainable locations is of greater weight than the delivery of one additional dwelling in a less sustainable location. Having regard to the significant supply of land for homes in the District it is considered that the objectives of paragraph 60 of the NPPF are being secured and that on the considerations of this application the objective to boost significantly the supply of homes should be given reduced weight.
It is considered that the development of this site would cause adverse impacts to the proper planning of the District having regard to the above mentioned development plan objectives to secure planned development in more sustainable locations rather than piecemeal development in less sustainable locations which significantly and demonstrably outweigh the limited benefits of this development.
As such the proposal is not acceptable in principle, being contrary to paragraphs 8 and 11 of the NPPF (2021), Policy H7 of the Mid Suffolk Local Plan (1998), Policies CS1 and CS2 of the Core Strategy (2008) and Policy FC1 and FC1.1 of the Core Strategy Focused Review (2012).
2. The proposed development results in the imposition of built development into the open countryside in a location where this would result in significant impacts on the character and appearance of the countryside, failing to protect or conserve landscape qualities and adversely impact the character of the countryside. As such the proposal would fail to comply with the requirements of Policy CL8 of the adopted Mid Suffolk Local Plan (1998), Policy CS5 of the Mid Suffolk Core Strategy (2008), and chapter 15 on the NPPF (2018).
3. The application fails to adequately demonstrate that the proposed development would not adversely impact protected species and delivery biodiversity net gain. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies CL8 of the adopted Mid Suffolk Local Plan (1998), CS5 of the Mid Suffolk Core Strategy (2008) and chapter 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021, the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.
(2) And the following informative notes as summarised and those as may be deemed necessary:
· Proactive working statement
Vote | Councillors | Count |
---|---|---|
For | James Caston, Kathie Guthrie, Dave Muller, Mike Norris and Rowland Warboys | 5 |
Against | None | 0 |
Abstain | None | 0 |
Conflict Of Interests | None | 0 |