Agenda item - 17/01191/FUL - Erection of 3 residential dwellings - Land between The Croft and Hopwood Garden Centre, Ash Lane, Alvechurch, Worcestershire, B48 7TT - Mr. N. Clarke

Agenda item

17/01191/FUL - Erection of 3 residential dwellings - Land between The Croft and Hopwood Garden Centre, Ash Lane, Alvechurch, Worcestershire, B48 7TT - Mr. N. Clarke

Minutes:

Officers clarified that the Application had been brought to the Planning Committee for consideration at the request of Councillor C. A. Hotham, Ward Member. 

 

Officers reported on an additional comment that had been received relating to drainage and that a further condition (Condition 10) was recommended in order to address ecological matters; as detailed in the published Update Report, copies of which were provided to Committee Members and the public gallery prior to the commencement of the meeting.

 

At the invitation of the Chairman, Mr. A. Smith, on behalf of Hopwood Residents Association and Chairman of Alvechurch Parish Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, addressed the Committee in objection to the Application.  Lauren Carpenter, the Applicant’s Agent addressed the Committee on behalf of the Applicant.  Councillor John Cypher, on behalf of Alvechurch Parish Council addressed the Committee in objection to the Application; and Councillor C. A. Hotham, Ward Member, also addressed the Committee.

 

The Committee then considered the Application, which had been recommended for approval by Officers.

 

Following the comments raised by Councillor Hotham, Members sought clarification from Officers in respect of Condition 5, as detailed on page 11 of the main agenda pack.  Mr S. Hawley, County Council Highways Officer, provided clarification and stated that following the comments made by Councillor Hotham and having reviewed the application, it would not be reasonable to adopt Condition 5, as the Condition did not serve a purpose, he would advise not to impose such a Condition.

 

With the agreement of the Chairman, the Council’s Planning Lawyer referred to a statement made by Mr. A. Smith, that planning permission be refused on the grounds of prematurity.  The Council’s Planning Lawyer informed the Committee that this may be appropriate where a proposed development was so substantial, that granting permission could prejudice a draft development plan policy, however, the Application being considered by Members, did not fall into that category, the Application was for the erection of 3 residential dwellings.

 

Members then sought further clarification from Officers on the village envelope boundary.

 

The Chairman agreed to an adjournment to enable Officers to locate and display an extract from the Bromsgrove District Plan 2011-2030, which would detail the boundary for Hopwood.

 

The meeting stood adjourned from 18:28 hours to 18:34 hours. 

 

Having re-convened Officers displayed an extract from the Bromsgrove District Plan 2011-2030; and further explained that the Alvechurch Parish Neighbourhood Plan, was in draft and had not been adopted, and that the village envelope boundary was not relevant to the Application being considered

 

Members went on to debate the definition of village, development outside of the village envelope and if the application complied with the NPPF.  Mr S. Hawley, County Council Highways Officer, commented that, with regard to the Site Visit conducted by some of the Members; and that following appeal, planning permission was granted to the bungalow on the opposite side.  The appeal allowed for development outside of the village envelope as it considered that it formed part of the village.  There was no definition of village.

 

Members considered how much weight they should give to the emerging Alvechurch Parish Neighbourhood Plan.

 

Having considered the Officer’s report and the representations made by the speakers, Members expressed their concerns with the design of the dwellings, in particular flat roofs and were therefore minded to refuse the Application, as it was out of keeping with other residential properties in the area and would impact on the existing street scene.

 

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be refused on the grounds that the development was not in keeping with other residential properties in the area, in particular the flat roof elements to the front and rear.  It would therefore impact on the existing street scene.

Supporting documents: