Agenda item

Proposed reconstruction of two storey dwelling house (private drainage system) (amended plans) at site of Former Hay Lane Cottage, Hay Lane, Milltown.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

Members were reminded that at its 20 February 2024 meeting Planning Committee had deferred consideration of the Application. Committee had agreed the deferral so that further work could take place on the applicability of planning policies, including Local Plan Policies SDC3 and SS9, to the Application and in particular, whether in planning terms the site qualified as ‘previously developed’ or ‘derelict’ land. The deferral was also intended to provide the Applicant and their Agent with an opportunity to consider what changes, if any, they wished to make to the Application in response to the specific concerns raised by Members.

The ‘addendum’ report considered by Committee made clear that following on from the deferral and discussions with the Applicant, amended plans had now been submitted. Under these amended plans aspects of the proposed development had been either removed entirely or would now be constructed using stone, rather than the originally specified materials.   

Despite these changes, Planning Committee was still recommended to reject the Application. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

Officers reiterated their original contention that the proposed development would not be located on ‘previously developed land’ or derelict land, and that it would have a greater impact on the countryside than if the existing ruins of the building were left in place. They had concluded that the development would not respect the distinctive landscape character of the area, but rather that it would cause significant harm to the character, quality, distinctiveness, and tranquillity of the landscape.

Before the Committee considered the Application it heard from local ward Member, Councillor H Wetherall, who had referred the Application to Committee. It also heard from A Marsh and N Marsh, who objected to the Application. Planning Committee then heard from the Applicant, R Sharpe, M Howe, C Clarke, K Haywood and the Agent for the Application, G Henshaw, who all spoke in support of the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the site’s location in an Area of Multiple Environmental Sensitivity and outside of any settlement development limits. It considered the relevant Local and National Planning Policies. These included Local Plan Policy SS1, on Sustainable Development, Local Plan Policy SS2, on Spatial Strategy and Local Plan Policy SDC3 on Landscape Character. It considered Local Policy SS9, restricting Development in the Countryside, and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPFF). In particular, the sections on rural housing (paragraphs 82-84) which explain that the creation of new isolated rural dwellings should be avoided, that effective use ought to be made of land (Chapter 11) and that the natural environment ought to be conserved and enhanced. Committee took into account the Ashover Neighbourhood Plan Policies. These included Policy AP2: Development Proposals Outside the Limits to Development, Policy AP13, Landscape Character and Policy AP19, Dark Skies.

Members discussed the Application. Some Members questioned the officer conclusion that the ruins had blended into the pastoral landscape to such an extent the site could no longer be classed as ‘previously developed’ or ‘derelict’ land. They highlighted the surviving structures and floor plan of the former Hay Cottage, which had become apparent following the removal of the vegetation which had progressively enveloped them. In this context, some Members suggested that the development would accord with Local Plan Policy SS9, permitting development in the countryside on previously developed land. They also felt that it the proposed development, which had been modified to reflect the concerns expressed at the last meeting of the Committee, would respect the character and quality of the landscape, and so accord with Local Plan Policy SDC3.

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor M Foster and H Liggett moved and seconded a motion to approve the Application. The Motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED -

That the Application be conditionally approved, contrary to officer recommendations.

That the imposition of appropriate conditions on the Application be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Management)

Reasons

1. The development would accord with Local Plan Policy SS9 1(f) as it would be located on previously developed land.

2. The development would accord with Local Plan Policy SDC (3) as it would be respectful to the landscape character of the area.