Agenda item

Removal of abandoned, partially constructed building and replace with no.1 residential dwelling - Land At Great Philham Farm, Hartland, Devon

The following Councillors had attended the site visit listed below:

Councillors:  C Leather, R Boughton, D Bushby, P Christie, R Craigie, R Lock, P Watson and R Wiseman

Application No.1/0081/2022/FUL - Removal of abandoned, partially constructed building and replace with no.1 residential dwelling - Land At Great Philham Farm, Hartland, Devon

Interests:

Officer recommendation:  Refuse

The planning application had been called into Plans Committee by Councillor Dart if the Officer was minded to recommend refusal, for the following reasons:

1.    This site is in desperate need of attention as what is existing, is an eyesore

2.    We currently have a shortage of housing stock, no 5 year housing land supply and this site is already half developed, (owing to the fact that historically there was a permission granted) albeit that it has now lapsed.

Prior to the presentation Members were informed of the following updates:

1.    Further to the submission of revised percolation tests, the Environmental Protection Officer has advised that suitable foul drainage arrangements can be provided.

Consequently, the third refusal reason in the Officer’s report can be disregarded.

2.    A further objection has been received since the Officers’ report was drafted.   The objection sets out concerns in relation to the manner in which a previous development was undertaken, as well as inaccuracies in respect of the current application to be considered today.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report and advised Members of the main planning considerations.

The following concerns/points were raised during the debate:

·         2002 planning application – proposal was to retain partially constructed structure on the site, this application had been refused but no formal enforcement action had been taken.  It does not preclude action from being taken because the structure is unauthorised.

·         When speaking on the application the Applicant and Agent referred to the proposal as a local needs dwelling, but the application is for a residential dwelling.  The Principal Planning Officer confirmed the application is for an open market dwelling, gave details of the policy that would need to be met and the requirement for a S106 Agreement to tie it in as a local needs dwelling.  

·         Sustainability issue – site not located within a Rural Settlement.

The Planning Manager addressed the Committee giving advice on the different criteria and avenues if the application had been for a local needs dwelling.   Officer’s will discuss with the applicant.

It was proposed by Councillor Christie, seconded by Councillor Watson that the application be refused.

A recorded vote was taken.

(Vote:  For 6, Against 3)

Resolved:

That the application be refused for the reasons as stated in the report.

The Planning Manager read out a statement submitted by Diana & Paul MacKarel objecting to the application.

Brenda Hedden addressed the Committee objecting to the application.

James Neep, Agent, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Anthony Brumham, Applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Councillor Dart, Ward Member, addressed the Committee.

In accordance with the Council Constitution it was proposed by Councillor Lock seconded by Councillor Leather and -

Resolved:   That in view of the fact that 3 hours had elapsed since the meeting had commenced, that the meeting should continue.

(Vote:  For - Unanimous)