Agenda item

Aylesbury Gardens, Newton Road, Swepstone

The Planning and Development Team Leader presented the report to Members.

Mr Makin, Parish Councillor, addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He felt that the site was not appropriate for this use and was a blot on the countryside.  Reference was made to the history of the site and the previous applications, and refusals that had been supported by Planning Inspectors, he felt that the arguments against the use of the site in this way remained.  He sympathised with the personal circumstances of the current occupiers of the site but felt that as planning permission sits with the land and not the person, there were real concerns with how much the site could grow in the future.  He urged the Committee to reject or defer the application to allow the appeal process to continue and for the decision to be taken by the Planning Inspector.

Mr Statham, agent, addressed the Committee.  He provided a summary of the history of the family that have been on the site for many years, the current family circumstances and reminded Members that no complaints had ever been received.  He commented that sites for Gypsies and Travellers had been promised by this Council for years and nothing has yet been provided.  He urged Members to approve the application so that the family could have a permanent place to live and adequate washroom facilities could be provided.

Councillor R Blunt, Ward Member, addressed the Committee.  He acknowledged the length of time that this matter and local concerns had been ensuing but he did sympathise with the views of the applicant.  He believed that the matter should be a decision of the Planning Inspector and therefore urged the Committee to reject or defer the application.

In determining the application the Members acknowledged the personal circumstances of the family currently living on the site, the delay in local authorities to provide adequate Gypsy and Traveller sites and the difficult situation for Members when making a decision.  Some concerns were raised in relation to the risk in setting a future precedent by how the Committee deal with the application and also the costs involved for the Council if Members were minded to defer.

A question was raised as to whether the Committee, if minded to approve the application, could impose a condition to erect fencing on the site so that public could still have access to the footpath around the site.  Officers advised that as it is a public highway it could not be imposed but a request could be made to the applicant.

As further discussions were moving towards deferral of the application, Officers asked that if Members were minded to defer then a decision would need to be made on whether officers should defend the appeal for the site that is to be redetermined, as representations would need to be made to the Planning Inspectorate.  Members were reminded by the Head of Planning and Infrastructure that circumstances had changed over the years in relation to the Gypsy and Traveller status and the unmet need for pitches which officers consider significantly outweighs the visual impact and previous reasons for refusal and so an appeal would be difficult to defend.

A motion to defer the application to allow an impartial decision to be taken by the Planning Inspector was moved by Councillor D Harrison and seconded by Councillor J Bridges.

The Chair put the motion to the vote.  A recorded vote being required, the voting was as detailed below.

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be deferred to allow an impartial decision to be made by the Planning Inspector.

[RECORDED VOTE TO BE INSERTED WHEN FINAL MINUTES MERGED]

Following a further discussion on the appeal process, the Chairman put the motion to defend the decision to the vote.  A recorded vote being required, the voting was as detailed below.

RESOLVED THAT:

The Council continue to defend at appeal the decision taken by  Committee in December 2016 for the previous reasons for refusal