Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report updating Members in relation to the current circumstances regarding the application 3/14/1448/OP and to enable the position of the Council to be considered in the light of further relevant information.

Members were reminded that the application had been for a significant development of up to 60 houses that had been refused by the Committee.  The Director advised that the applicant had lodged an appeal and a public inquiry was scheduled to begin in August 2015.  Members were advised that it was important to take account of any new information or change in circumstances to ensure that a clear and cogent case was presented at the inquiry.

The Director advised that the wording in the second reason for refusal referred to the loss of roadside hedgerows.  Members were advised that this element of the Council’s case should not be pursued as the scheme had been amended to bring footways within the site.  As a result of this there would, in fact, be an increase in hedgerows.

The Director advised that the Council’s Conservation Officer had further examined the site in some detail and had judged that it would not be possible to view the Conservation Area of the existing settlement and the proposed development in the same context at the same time.  The Officer therefore considered that whilst there would be an impact on the wider landscape there would not be a detrimental impact on the Braughing Conservation Area.

The Director therefore advised that the second reason for refusal be amended as detailed on page 120 of the report now submitted.  Members were reminded that fewer stronger reasons were preferable when dealing with a public inquiry as weaker arguments would undermine the Council’s case.

The Director advised that the local ward Member had liaised with the Parish Council and local residents and he was concerned that elements of the Council’s reasons for refusal were being set aside.  He had been advised by Officers of the importance of ensuring a concise and strong case at the public inquiry.

Councillor J Cartwright suggested that recommendation (C) be amended as Councillor Mrs R Cheswright had been both Chairman and the local Member at the time the application had been refused, but was now neither.  Members endorsed the recommendations detailed in the report subject to the inclusion of Councillor P Ruffles in recommendation (C) regarding the consultation that would be undertaken by the Head of Planning and Building Control.

RESOLVED – that (A) in relation to reason for refusal 1, the Council prepares its case in relation to the forthcoming public inquiry with authority delegated to Officers to deal with matters arising as detailed in recommendation (C);

(B)   in relation to reason for refusal 2, the Council does not pursue a case in relation to Conservation issues or the loss of roadside hedgerows at the forthcoming public inquiry, and informs the appellant of its position; and

(C)   the Head of Planning and Building Control, in consultation with Councillor P Ruffles as Chairman of this meeting, the Chairman of the Committee and the local ward Member, be authorised to engage with the appellants in relation to all matters relevant to the appeal and to formulate, alter, amend and update the Council’s statement and evidence to be submitted in relation to the forthcoming public inquiry.