Agenda item

Former Army Camp, Main Road, Redmile

The Planning Development Manager addressed the Committee and provided a summary of the application and summarised that the recommendation was for refusal. He advised that comments had been received from the Parish Council and the Ward Councillor. He referred to the isolated location and that paragraph 80 must be met to approve the application and it was a high bar test to meet both elements of paragraph 80(e).

It was noted that the application met the eco requirement as it had characteristics of a ‘passive’ house but determining whether the design was exceptional was subjective and there was no measure for this. The recommendation reflected the Officers’ view after reviewing other examples of paragraph 80 designs presented through the professional planning officer’s network.

With regard to determining whether the design was acceptable, Members felt some guidance was needed. However  it was understood that there was a judgement balance to be made in determining the application against the criteria of paragraph 80(e).

It was noted that the applicant had used the term nature reserve instead of the usual landscape plan which was felt to reinforce the ecological benefits.

Pursuant to Chapter 2, Part 9, Paragraphs 2.8-2.28 of the Council’s Constitution in relation to  public speaking at Planning Committee, the Chair allowed the following to give a 3 minute presentation:

·          Richard Cooper of HSSP

 Mr Cooper responded to Member questions as follows:

•   Paragraph 80 could be interpreted in many forms, some were grand designs but this was holistic in that the building, landscape design and site and were integrally linked

•   The roof was made of metal sheeting which was common to industrial buildings in the area. There were solar panels on the roof also

During discussion the following points were noted:

·         There was support for this type of application due to the environmental benefits and it was felt such applications should be taken seriously as there had been missed opportunities in the past to approve such forward thinking development

·         The former army camp was an eyesore and this application would improve the site

·         Building materials to support environmental initiatives would only become more commercially available and less expensive if applications such as this were approved

·         Expensive contamination tests would be needed if the application was approved and the Council should back schemes where developers were willing to invest in sites such as this

·         Members were impressed by the ecological benefits but some were not so sure that the design had the wow factor

·         It was felt to be a rare opportunity to approve a passive house

·         There was concern as to the subjective decision-making of whether the design was exceptional and how this could be resolved. It was noted each person’s opinion was different but the design should be outstanding and enhance its setting

·         There was a feeling that more should be done in planning terms to meet the Council’s Climate Change Strategy and to refuse the application would be in conflict with supporting this important initiative

·         It was felt that for the design to stand out was not necessarily a criteria to meet and the design had its own outstanding quality in that it blended with the landscape and provided a major step forward in sustainable energy

·         There was a request for a footpath to the village and if approved this should be negotiated with the developer and the Parish Council and it was advised that this could not be subject to a s106 agreement

·         It was felt the proposal met paragraph 80e in its outstanding architecture not only in its green credentials but in the way the human and natural elements of the architecture blended together, raising standards of the design in rural areas and would be exemplary in its design, enhancing the immediate setting in clearing up the site and sensitive to reflect the local area and the historic architecture of what was already there

Councillor Holmes proposed that the application be approved subject to appropriate conditions delegated for determination by the Assistant Director for Planning and Delivery and to negotiate provision of the proposed footpath. Councillor Wood seconded the motion.

RESOLVED

That application 20/01265/FUL be APPROVED, contrary to the Officer recommendation, subject to appropriate conditions delegated for determination by the Assistant Director for Planning and Delivery and to

to negotiate provision of the proposed footpath.

(Unanimous)