Agenda and minutes

No declarations of interest were made.

RESOLVED

that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 22 January 2020, be received and approved as a correct record.

RESOLVED that

1.  V/2019/0491, Ashfield Ltd, Outline Application with some matters reserved for a Maximum of 100 Dwellings and Associated Access Land to the rear of 211, Alfreton Road

In accordance with the Council’s Policy for dealing with late matters in relation to planning applications (Minute No. D4.17, 1993/94 refers), officers proceeded to give a verbal report as to additional comments received in relation to the application as follows:-

Two issues were brought to Members’ attention:

• A letter had been received from a local resident, requesting a Tree Preservation Order on four Ash trees located in the south western corner of the site. Three of these were identified as B Category in the submitted Tree Survey. This meant that the trees were of moderate quality value, with a minimum life expectancy of 20 years. The other was in poor quality health and classified as U, meaning that it could not be realistically retained for longer than ten years and all required extensive works. Whilst the Council encouraged the retention of trees wherever possible, the trees highlighted had limited life expectancy and therefore a TPO was not recommended in this case.

• Due to the land levels and a stream, it was not considered appropriate to provide direct pedestrian access to Rookery Park, as there was an alternative route available.  It was therefore proposed that condition 7 is amended to remove this requirement.

An objector, Sheila Clarke and Councillor David Walters (as Ward Member), took the opportunity to address the Committee in respect of this matter and Members were offered the opportunity to clarify any points raised during the submissions as required.

It was moved by Councillor Jason Zadrozny and seconded by Councillor Tom Hollis that the officer’s recommendation contained within the report be rejected and planning consent be refused.

Reasons for refusing planning permission

1.    The proposal is considered to represent an unsustainable form of development, which does not meet the overarching social and environmental objectives set out within paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework  (NPPF). This is because of the following:

·           There would be a loss of open space and adverse impact on the landscape character, which is contrary to policies ST1 and RC2 of the Ashfield Local Plan Review (ALPR).

·           The primary schools within the area are at capacity and there is no specific site identified for a new school. This is contrary to paragraph 94 of the NPPF, which states that a great weight should be attached to education.

·           The development in proximity to the landfill tip could have a harmful impact on human health, contrary to paragraph 180 of the NPPF.

·           There would be an adverse impact on biodiversity in the area with the potential loss of hedgerows, trees and impact on wildlife contrary to policy EV8 of the ALPR.

(At this point in the proceedings, Councillor Tom Hollis declared Non Disclosable Pecuniary/Other Interests in relation to the three applications under consideration at the meeting due to him having spoken to both the applicants  ...  view the full minutes text for item P.27