URL: https://democracy.northdevon.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4020

Decision Maker: Planning Committee

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: The Committee considered a report by the Senior Planning Officer (DB) (circulated previously) regarding planning application 79124.   Rebecca Griffiths (supporter), Mary Christianson (on behalf of Simon Gill – objector) and Councillor David Ball (representing Chittlehamholt, Satterleigh and Warkleigh Parish Council) addressed the Committee.   The Senior Corporate and Community Services Officer read a statement on behalf of Tommy May (applicant) to the Committee.   In response to comments made and questions from the Committee, the Service Manager (Development Management) advised the following:   ·       The application was for planning permission for the location and the references made by speakers in relation to noise activity such as chain saws, quad bikes, gun shots from the location were not related to this planning application and would be covered under separate legislation.  She was aware that Environmental Health had visited the location a number of times under separate legislation and that there was no statutory noise nuisance.   In response to comments made and questions from the Committee, the Senior Planning Officer (DB) advised the following:   ·       The National Planning Policy for traveller sites, National Planning Policy Framework and policies within the Local Plan needed to be considered as a whole in relation to a permanent siting of a caravan as gypsy and travellers accommodation. ·       An amended plan had been submitted by the applicant which identified the land owned by the applicant. ·       Devon County Council did not request any improvements to be made to the visibility splay. However, they did advise that improvements could be made by cutting the hedge back.  This had been included as a condition. ·       A septic tank was not in place, however it would be part of the Building Control regulations.  A compostable toilet was currently being used on site. ·       The Enforcement Officer had visited the site on a number of occasions in relation to compliance on the wider site. ·       The proposal was to remove the coach that was currently on the site and replace with a caravan.  The definition and size of a caravan was set out on page 60 of the report. ·       The nursery fell within the definition of agricultural use.  The applicant had received forestry grants for the site which fell within the definition of agricultural use. ·       There was no enforcement action being taken in relation to the commercial use of the site. There was still an open enforcement investigation on the wider site.  Some of these works had been undertaken prior to the applicant taking over the site. ·       Reference to the National Planning Policy for Gypsy and Traveller Sites had been included within the report along with the National Planning Policy Framework and Local Plan.   Councillor David Ball (representing Chittlehamholt, Satterleigh and Warkleigh Parish Council) advised that as part of his presentation to the Committee he was pointing out factual inaccuracy within the planning balance whereby paragraph 27 Paragraph 27 of the Governments Planning Policy for Traveller Sites Policy Paper had been misquoted.   In response to comments made and questions from the Committee, the Senior Planning Officer (DB) advised the following:   ·       That the policy section of the report which included the National Planning Policy for Gypsy and Traveller Sites  and the Local Plan and assessment of compliance with policies needed to be looked at as material considerations. ·       The NPPTS policy included reference to temporary pitches when discussing the consideration of lack of supply however this was only one part of a larger policy that needs to be accounted for. ·       The application was for the provision of one pitch.  Further planning permission would be required for additional pitches on the site. ·       Proposed condition 7 required the visibility splays be retained. ·       The location of the proposed caravan needed to be sited within the red line of the plan.   In response to questions from the Committee, the Service Manager (Development Management) advised the following:   ·       That there was enforcement still open on the wider site and any other enforcement issues identified would be looked at. ·       Reference to another site near Rackenford would have been considered as a rural workers dwelling under policy DM28 which was different circumstances to this planning application. ·       If the Committee considered to approve for a temporary period, then there needed to be sound and reasonable reasons provided why a temporary permission should be given as opposed to a permanent permission. ·       No gypsy and traveller sites had been put forward in the Local Plan, therefore there was no provision in North Devon.   She read out Policy ST20 which was detailed on page 49 of the report.   Councillor Whitehead, addressed the Committee, in her capacity as Ward Member.   In response to questions, the Solicitor and Data Protection Officer advised the following:   ·       That if the Committee considered the approval for a temporary period, there was a need to ensure appropriate and reasonable conditions and consider implications for the family and whether it was appropriate to make it a temporary permission. ·       There had been no objections from consultees.  The Committee needed to consider the material considerations which were the National Planning Policy for Gypsy and Traveller Sites, the NPPF and the Local Plan, which this application was compliant with.  It was not finely balanced in terms of planning considerations and the Committee needed to consider how, if at all, it would look different if it came back to the Committee for consideration in 3 years time that would warrant making a temporary planning permission   RESOLVED (8 for, 0 against, 3 abstained) that the application be APPROVED as recommended by the Senior Planning Officer (DB).

Date of Decision: December 4, 2024