Agenda item

Report No: DEV/WS/19/005

Outline Planning Application (Means of Access to be considered) - 4no. dwellings with garaging and creation of new vehicular access

Outline Planning Application (Means of Access to be considered) - 4no. dwellings with garaging and creation of new vehicular access

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel.

Troston Parish Council supported the application which was contrary to the Officer recommendation of refusal, for the reason set out in Paragraph 59 of Report No DEV/WS/19/005.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.

As part of her presentation the Senior Planning Officer advised the Committee that the Parish Council had submitted a late, further representation largely reiterating their earlier points raised and this was read out to the meeting.

In response to this, the Case Officer made reference to the specific types of schemes which may be permitted outside of a designated settlement boundary.  However, in respect of the application before the Committee, Officers considered there to be no material considerations to set the Plan aside.

Speakers:    Councillor Simon Brown (Ward Member: Pakenham & Troston) spoke in support of the application

                   Philip Cobbold (agent) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Jim Thorndyke made reference to a previous planning application which resulted in the change of use of agricultural land to recreational Public Open Space; the site in question falling outside the settlement boundary of Troston.

In response, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that the reallocation of the settlement boundary in relation to the recreation area could be addressed as part of the impending review and development of a West Suffolk Local Plan.

Councillor Roger Dicker proposed that the application be refused, as per the Officer recommendation, and this was duly seconded by Councillor Ian Houlder.

Upon being put to the vote and with 14 voting for the motion, 1 against and with 1 abstention, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

1.      The site falls outside the settlement boundary of Troston which is defined as an Infill Village under Core Strategy Policy CS4. Policy RV3 of the Rural Vision 2031 states that residential development will be permitted within housing settlement boundaries where it is not contrary to other policies in the plan. There are exceptions to allow for housing development in the countryside as set out under DM5, DM26, DM27 and DM29 (affordable, rural workers dwellings, replacement dwellings and infill where there is a cluster of 10 or more existing dwellings), but this proposal does not satisfy any of these exceptions. The site is also not allocated for residential development in the Local Plan. West Suffolk can demonstrate a five year housing land supply and therefore the development plan can be considered up to date. The proposals therefore fail to comply with policy RV3 of the Rural Vision 2031, Core Strategy policy CS1 and CS4, Policies DM5 and DM27 of the Joint Development Management Policies Local Plan and the 2019 NPPF, particularly paragraphs 11, 77 and 79 and is considered unacceptable as a matter of principle. Moreover the proposal would encroach into the countryside and be harmful to the verdant and undeveloped village edge, contrary to policy DM2. The limited social and economic benefits from the provision of four market houses is considered to significantly and demonstrably be outweighed by the proposal harmfully undermining the adopted spatial strategy for rural housing in the development plan and harm to the visual amenity of the area.