Decision details

The Committee received an application for Outline Planning Permission.

 

The application sought approval for the erection of a cycle-themed café (A3 use) and shop along with associated infrastructure including car and cycle parking and new internal roads.

The Committee received a representation in support of the application from Jim Chisholm.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

       i.          Area was currently a neglected and underused space.

     ii.          The Chisholm Trail development would significantly change the character of the space and bring increased activity levels to it.  This includes the way in which fishing club members will access the lake.

   iii.          Whilst not necessarily against a Café on the site, the scale of the application was excessive. Green belt land needed to be protected in accordance with national policy.

   iv.          Lake side café facilities are not unusual within public green spaces.

    v.          The proposal as it stands would have limited visual impact.

   vi.          Expressed concern regarding the A3  proposal which would allow a wide range of uses within the same use class without the need for further planning permission.

 vii.          Some of the outstanding issues could be addressed by a future reserved matters application.

viii.          The Committee acknowledged the case officer’s advice that the present unmanaged condition of the land and presence of fly tipping did not amount to very special circumstances.

 

The Legal representative outlined the framework of exceptions allowed to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) restriction regarding development within the Green Belt. This includes (para 89) provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor recreation.

 

The New Neighbourhoods Development Manager reminded members that, approval of this application would require consultation with the Secretary of State due to the green belt and flood risk issues according to the Consultation Direction 2009.

 

On a show of hands, 4 members indicated that they rejected the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.

 

The Chair proposed instigating the Adjourned Decision Protocol and asked members to give their reasons for overturning the Officer’s recommendation. The following reasons were proposed:

 

       i.          Increased recreational use of green belt land

     ii.          Overall net benefit to the community.

 

The legal advisor suggested that more robust reasons regarding the appropriateness of the development as exceptional development within the Green Belt would be needed.

 

Councillor Nethsingha moved a motion deferring the decision on the grounds of insufficient information.

 

On a show of hands, the motion was lost.

 

The Chair stated that considerable adjustments were needed to make the application acceptable.

 

The New Neighbourhoods Development Manager indicated that Members might wish to send a strong message to the applicant to supplement the information provided in respect of unresolved issues in the application.

 

The Committee:

 

Unanimously resolved to adjourn the application to return to a subsequent Committee in accordance with the adjourned decision protocol.