To receive any announcements from the Chairman and any matters of communication.

The Chairman advised the meeting that the order of business for the planning applications would be Items 6, 9, 7 and 8.

(Note: the above running order was subsequently amended to be Items 6, 9, 8 and 7).

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on 8 November 2017 (copy to follow).

RESOLVED

that the minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on 6 December 2017 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

To receive from Members any declarations of interest including membership of any Parish/Town Council consulted upon during the planning application process and the way in which a Member cast his/her vote.

To consider the report of the Director of Regeneration and Business which provides a monthly update of planning enforcement cases where action has been taken.

The Chairman advised Members to raise any issues they might have with regard to planning enforcement cases with the Planning Enforcement and Appeals Team Leader.

Address:       Existing public car park, St Andrews Place, Church Street, Ampthill, MK45 2EW

Erection of 8 dwellings alongside the provision of 12 public car parking spaces and demolition of existing boundary wall.

Applicant:     Dandara Ltd

The Committee considered a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/03883/FULL for the erection of 8 dwellings alongside the provision of 12 public car parking spaces and the demolition of an existing boundary wall at the existing public car park, St Andrew’s Place, Church Street, Ampthill.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional comments and an additional informative as set out in the Late Sheet.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Ampthill Town Council, objectors to the application and the applicant under the public participation scheme.

A Member sought clarification from the Ampthill Business Chamber representative, as an objector, as to whether the staff of local businesses had been mandated to use the car park.  He then commented that signage was well signposted at the site itself but asked if the Chamber had put any parking signposting in the town itself.  In response to the second question the representative stated that consideration could be given to providing such information on the large plan showing local businesses which the Chamber had placed in the town.  She added that, as a Business Chamber, it would be difficult to require employers to tell their staff to use the car park especially if the staff were required to pay.  However, Waitrose, as a local employer, had indicated that it would require its staff to park there if parking was free.  She also felt that many businesses were not aware that the car park existed.

The Member then sought clarification from the applicant with regard to the planning officer’s report which appeared to suggest the company had not made a s106 contribution or affordable housing contribution as a part of its previous original application.  In response the applicant explained the process undertaken and how, because the car park was assumed to generate income, a higher financial contribution had in fact been made to the Council’s affordable housing fund.  If the car park had not been provided it would have assumed no income would have been generated from the site and a lower contribution would have been made.  He stressed that the company had made a contribution to the Council towards the latter’s provision of affordable housing.

In response to other Members’ queries the applicant stated that the site had now been assessed for business rates and a bill of £800 pm had recently been received.  The car park had been in operation since late 2015 but usage data was only available from May 2016 when the necessary monitoring equipment had been installed following the realisation there was an issue with use.   The applicant advised that he was unable to state how much money had been contributed to the affordable housing fund but he or the case officer could supply this information.

A Member sought clarification on the level of the financial loss for the car park.  The meeting was advised that the total loss was approximately £1,250 pm.  This sum included the monthly  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

The Committee considered a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/04334/FULL for proposed staff accommodation at Caldecote House Farm, 8 Caldecote Green, Upper Caldecote, Biggleswade, SG18 9BX.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional responses, additional comments and an additional informative as set out in the Late Sheet.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received a representation from Northill Parish Council under the public participation scheme.

The ward Member commented that the proposed building was alongside an existing barn and therefore contrary to Policy DM4.  In addition the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stated that new building in rural areas should be avoided.  The work to be performed was seasonal so if workers were required then a temporary structure was sufficient.

The Committee considered the application and in summary discussed the following:

·         The planning officer’s comment that he did feel that the possible use of an agricultural tie for the proposed dwelling was possible as it did not meet the test set out in the NPPF.  Following a further query another planning officer advised that an agricultural tie was imposed on properties where development was not usually permitted.  In this case the proposed development was acceptable in its own right.

·         The provision of two bedrooms was not excessive as it allowed flexibility and allowed the employment of more than one worker.  It also made no material planning difference.

·         The planning officer’s statement that, with regard to the avoidance of isolated dwellings in the countryside, his views remained.  Whilst the NPPF overrode PS7 there was still a reliance on PS7 and a Planning Inspector would….Whilst the proposed dwelling did not comply with the Council’s Design Guidelines and was less than 21 meters from another property it was of modest proportions and so was regarded as acceptable.

On being put to the vote 9 Members voted for approval, 0 voted against and 1 abstained.

RESOLVED

that Planning Application No. CB/17/04334/FULL relating to Caldecote House, 8 Caldecote Green, Upper Caldecote, Biggleswade, SG18 9BX be approved as set out in the Schedule attached to these minutes.

Address:       Caldecote House, 8 Caldecote Green, Upper Caldecote, Biggleswade, SG18 9BX

Proposed staff accommodation.

Applicant:     Maudlin G J & Sons

The Committee considered a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/04334/FULL for proposed staff accommodation at Caldecote House Farm, 8 Caldecote Green, Upper Caldecote, Biggleswade, SG18 9BX.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to an additional consultation, an additional comment and an additional informative as set out in the Late Sheet.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received a representation from Northill Parish Council under the public participation scheme.

The ward Member expressed his objection to the application.  He stated that  the proposed accommodation was sited alongside an existing barn inside the farm entrance.  The location was outside the settlement envelope and was contrary to Policy DM4.  Its proximity to no. 7 Caldecote Green was contrary to the Council’s Design Guidelines.  In addition the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stated that local authorities should avoid new isolated houses in the countryside unless there was an essential need for a worker to live permanently at or near the site  The ward Member reiterated the point made by the Town Council representative that the work to be undertaken at the farm was seasonal in nature and so a temporary structure should be considered.

(Note: Councillor Firth remained within the Chamber but took no further part in the debate or in the vote on this item).

The Committee considered the application and in summary discussed the following:

·         The planning officer’s comment that, from a planning perspective,  the proposed accommodation was considered acceptable whether for temporary or permanent use and that the imposition of an agricultural tie was not considered viable as it would not meet the requirements set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).  A second planning officer explained that an agricultural tie was imposed where development would not usually be allowed and an exception was being made because of agricultural need.  In this case the proposed dwelling was considered acceptable in its own right irrespective of agricultural need so it would be neither necessary or reasonable to restrict occupancy to an agricultural worker.

·         The provision of two bedrooms was not considered excessive as it provided the applicant’s flexibility if there were more than one worker.  The inclusion of a second bedroom made no material planning difference to the application.

·         The possible use of existing farm buildings for accommodation purposes was not before the Committee for consideration.  The Committee was required, however, to assess what was before it as being acceptable in planning terms.

·         The planning officer acknowledged the requirements of the NPPF regarding isolated dwellings in the countryside and that the NPPF outweighed the old PPS7.  However, the NPPF said little about agricultural workers’ accommodation and many planners and Planning Inspectors relied upon the detailed tests set out within the old PPS7 when evaluating such issues.  His view remained that the application represented a sustainable form of development without the need for an agricultural tie.

·         The planning officer acknowledged that the proposed dwelling was contrary to the Council’s Design Guidelines  ...  view the full minutes text for item 100.

Address:       12 North Lane, Haynes, Beds. MK45 3PW

Outline Application: erection of up to two dwellings.

Applicant:     Mrs Roberts

The Committee considered a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/04022/OUT, an outline application for the erection of up to two dwellings at 12 North Lane, Haynes, Beds. MK45 3PW.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional comments as set out in the Late Sheet.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Haynes Parish Council and an objector to the application.

A Member sought clarification from the Parish Council representative with regard to the concerns which had been raised by that Council.  In response the Parish Councillor explained that Parish Councillors’ views on the application varied and he was, therefore, constrained in his response and could only refer to the form of words which he had read out.  In view of this situation the Chairman referred the Central Bedfordshire Council Member to the objections received from some occupants of North Lane as set out in the planning officer’s report.

The ward Member set out her objections to the application.  She first referred to two errors by the officers relating to the application including a reference in the Late Sheet to a local bus service stopping in Bedford Road (A600) opposite the site.  This was inaccurate as Bedford Road was some two miles away.  She added that a choice had to be made on a proposed change of use and the replacement of an existing ancient orchard by the provision of two houses.  She emphasised that the plans supplied were purely indicative and there was no idea of the size of the properties or parking provision.  The ward Member stressed the unique character of North Lane.  She referred to the sewers being sometimes problematic and that no consultation had been carried out with either the British Horse Society or Ramblers Society as users of the Lane.  Further, the application site was outside the settlement envelope, there was need to consider the impact on wildlife and the need to consider the views of the village.  She supported the retention of the land as open space and reminded the meeting that Central Bedfordshire Council had its required five year land supply; refusing the application would not significantly impact on it.  Allowing the application, however, would have a major impact and open the way to further development outside the settlement envelope. 

The Committee considered the application and in summary discussed the following:

·         The planning officer’s comment on the need to assess the application on its own merits, that the site lay between two existing dwellings and that the proposed development could therefore be classed as infill.  He acknowledged that there had been no development in North Lane for 60 years but the Committee was required to determine the application before it.  He added that it was unlikely that wildlife or the general use of North Lane would be adversely impacted to any great extent.  North Lane was a fairly typical country lane and he would not expect footpaths to be present.

·         The planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 101.

Address:       Land at Chapel End Road and London Lane, Houghton Conquest, Beds. MK45 3LN

Outline application seeking detailed approval of vehicular and pedestrian access only, with all other matters reserved; for the creation of 16 self-build homes and all associated works including surface water attenuation, car parking and landscaping.

Applicant:     Self-Build-Developments Ltd

The Committee considered a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/16/02971/OUT, an outline application seeking detailed approval of vehicular and pedestrian access only, with all other matters reserved; for the creation of 16 self-build homes and all associated works including surface water attenuation, car parking and landscaping on land at Chapel End Road and London Lane, Houghton Conquest, Beds. MK45 3LN.

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional comments as set out in the Late Sheet.

No representations were made.

The Committee considered the application and in summary discussed the following:

·         The payment of a commuted sum of £290,400, on a date to be agreed, by the applicant in lieu of the onsite provision of affordable housing.  This followed the receipt of evidence that Registered Providers would not be able to/willing to deliver such housing.  The commuted sum would be delivered by a s106 Agreement and the sum put towards future affordable housing within Central Bedfordshire.

·         The means by which the level of the commuted sum had been reached.  The planning officer reported this was the first self-build scheme with an affordable housing contribution it and had therefore been submitted for an independent viability assessment.  A methodology had since been agreed which could be used for further such schemes in the future.

On being put to the vote 11 Members voted for approval, 0 voted against and 1 abstained.

RESOLVED

that Planning Application No. CB/16/02971/OUT relating to land at Chapel End Road and London Lane, Houghton Conquest, Beds. MK45 3LN be approved as set out in the Schedule attached to these minutes.

To receive and note, prior to considering the planning applications contained in the schedules above, any additional information detailed in the Late Sheet to be circulated on 5 December 2017.

In advance of consideration of the planning applications attached to the agenda the Committee received a Late Sheet advising it of additional consultation/publicity responses, comments and proposed additional/amended conditions.  A copy of the Late Sheet is attached as an appendix to these minutes.

Under the provisions of the Members’ Planning Code of Good Practice, Members are requested to note that the next Development Management Committee will be held on 3 January 2018 and the Site Inspections will be undertaken on 2 January 2018.

NOTED

that the next meeting of the Development Management Committee will be held on 3 January 2018.

RESOLVED

that all Members and substitute Members along with the relevant ward representatives be invited to conduct site inspections on 2 January 2018.