Agenda item

Outline application for 5 no. dwellings with all matters reserved except access.

The Committee considered a report of the Planning Officer regarding an outline application for 5 no. dwellings with all matters reserved except access (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Principal Planning Officer provided the Committee with a detailed presentation on the application which included photographs of the site. A site visit had been arranged for Members to view the location and setting.

In making his presentation the Principal Planning Officer advised that since the report had been circulated Public Rights of Way had withdrawn their objections to the application.

Mr Holburn, an objector addressed the Committee stating that he wished to focus on the highways and environmental aspects of the proposals.

In terms of highways he noted that no objections had been offered from the Highways Authority but their comments focused primarily on the access. His concerns related to the narrow width of the lane leading to the development. The proposals suggested that two cars could pass with additional widening but this did not take into account the use of the lane by pedestrians. At two cars per property this would pose a significant risk.

It appeared from the site plan that the proposed turning head for refuse vehicles formed an access to another dwelling.

With regard to environmental impact Mr Holburn stated that the land sloped down to the River Browney and that the proposals included a species rich meadow. Soil would be removed as part of the development works and this may destabilise the land following rain and natural erosion. Three of the dwellings would have access to the meadow which may result in disturbance to wildlife.

Mr C Megson spoke on behalf of Deerness Kennels. The land was designated Green Belt and planning policy restricted development in these locations. The applicant had submitted that the development would not undermine the Green Belt. The openness of Green Belt was considered to be the absence of built development. The proposals would lead to a loss of openness of the Green Belt and as such would not conform with Part 9 of the NPPF.

Alterations to the Green Belt should be considered through the Local Plan process where they were subject to relevant public scrutiny and inquiry as part of a longer term strategy. The proposals were contrary to Policy H5 of the Local Plan as the houses were not associated with a proven agricultural or forestry need.

Noise pollution was a consideration in the NPPF and whilst the applicant had submitted a full Noise Assessment, Environmental Health had raised concerns which were outlined in the report. The proposed development would be susceptible to noise nuisance and this would compromise his client’s operations. His client played an important role in the area.

Mr M Creedy, the applicant’s agent stated that he wished to present a statement from Brandon and Byshottles Parish Council in the absence of Parish Councillor N Rippon who was unable to attend due to parish commitments.

The Parish Council and Community Group had registered their support to the application. The Parish Council having visited the site considered that it would be hugely positive, would add diversity to the housing stock and improve the visual amenity of open space overlooking the site. 

The site was located on the edge of Langley Moor and whilst it was within the Green Belt it constituted previously developed land and was currently an eyesore. Views to and from the site would be improved and Landscape Officers had advised that it would partially screen buildings from the Browney, would improve the biodiversity of the area and would provide a wildflower meadow. The land was currently covered by concrete paths and posts. This scheme would improve the visual amenity of the area and would improve the Green Belt.

The scheme was also an excellent example of carbon neutral accommodation in Langley Moor. Highways works were proposed which offered improvements to existing arrangements and access to the existing footpath in the area.

The development was close to Langley Moor High Street, the main shopping street in the area, and was also close to public transport links.

In conclusion the Parish Council was of the view that this well-considered and unique development should be welcomed. It could lead the way to demonstrating how sustainable and carbon neutral housing could be achieved, making a positive contribution to the area.

Mr J Elmer, the applicant stated that Mill Road Passivhaus development was the first group in County Durham of this sort and the profit would be utilised as a springboard for providing more in the future. He provided Members with details of the Passivhaus concept and benefits.

The development would restore a previously developed landscape, and would visually improve the location through planting and green roofs, extensive landscaping and a wildflower meadow. The proposals were supported by the Landscapes Section and the highway and access arrangements were to the satisfaction of the Highways Authority. The unregistered footpath would be unaffected by the proposals and homeowners would be able to access local facilities easily from the site.

Mr Elmer addressed the concerns expressed about noise, stating that the noise assessment carried out surpassed the standards required by BS4142 and the proposed noise reduction measures would result in negligible external noise. Internally the homes would be silent.

Friends of Langley Moor had also offered their support to the proposals who believed that the uniqueness of the development could add prestige to the village. The development would not compromise the security of the kennels or the dogs and he considered that neighbours would provide protection. The proposed noise measures would benefit both the kennels and residents, and his noise consultant had concluded that the claims made about the impact of noise were unfounded. The current situation relating to noise issues would be improved.

He had demonstrated how constraints could be overcome and that this was an exceptional scheme which would bring forward a significant development without compromising the environment for the future.

The Principal Planning Officer responded to the submissions made. With regard to the comments made about the potential impact on the wildlife meadow he advised that Planning Officers consulted with the Council’s Landscape Officers who had offered no objections to the proposed habitat enhancements.

The comments made by Mr Megson on behalf of the kennels were endorsed and the Green Belt was a significant consideration. In accordance with Part 9 of the NPPF, development of a Green Belt was inappropriate unless there were exceptional circumstances. Officers did not consider that very special circumstances had been demonstrated here, and whilst this was a high quality scheme in terms of sustainability the location was inappropriate. Landscape Officers considered that the scheme offered benefits in terms of the landscape but Planning Officers did not feel that this outweighed the harm to the Green Belt.

With regard to the references that the site was previously developed land, the Officer advised that as could be seen from the site photographs existing development was minimal and was assimilated into the landscape. The proposals were significant in terms of visual impact on the area.     

In terms of the noise assessment submitted by the applicant, Planning Officers relied upon the views of its own Environmental Health Officers.

Councillor Freeman was of the view that whilst the houses may be eco-friendly in design this would be off-set by the damage caused to the Green Belt. The development was not within the settlement of Langley Moor, was located next to an industrial estate and the amenity of the residents would be affected by noise from the kennels.

Moved by Councillor Freeman and seconded by Councillor Laing it was

Resolved:

That the application be refused for the reasons set out in the report.