Agenda item

New detached house for permanent residence

Land West of Radcliffe Park, Radcliffe Park, Bamburgh, NE69 7AN

New detached house for permanent residence.
Land West of Radcliffe Park, Radcliffe Park, Bamburgh, NE69 7AN

J. Hudson – Senior Planning Officer, introduced the application and gave the following updates:

·       A late representation from Bamburgh Parish Council had been submitted and included the following information:

                        i.         The proposed site sat behind the corner between the larger detached houses at the entrance to Radcliffe Park, and the houses on Radcliffe Road, which were all large, individual detached houses. The entrance to Radcliffe Park was dominated by West house, a 3-storey house much taller than the proposed dwelling.

                       ii.         The driveway of the proposed dwelling entered a quiet cul-de-sac along with the driveways of the 2 other detached houses. The Conservation Officer stated, “The dwelling would not integrate into existing highway routes easily.” That statement would not hold up to scrutiny.

                     iii.         The Parish Council had concerns with the response of Highways. The response seemed to prioritise sustainability, not their stated aims to check that the proposal would not result in an adverse impact on highway safety. There was a fundamental presumption in favour of the development but based on Highways reading, that being in a location which is reliant on a private car, and which does not provide a genuine choice of transport modes, there was an objection to the development. The basis for objection covered not only the application, but vast swathes of rural Northumberland.

                     iv.         Highway concerns seemed misplaced; in that they had highlighted sustainability over road safety. The building would be constructed to contemporary standards with high levels of insulation. It would be heated by a ground source heat pump, working in combination with a ground mounted solar panel array.

                      v.         Inconsistencies eroding public confidence in the planning system. When Highways were consulted regarding a proposal to build 10 houses at the Friars, just up from Radcliffe Road, they made no objections.

                     vi.         The AONB supported the application on the grounds that it would make a positive contribution to sustainable communities in the Neighbourhood Area.

                    vii.         Bamburgh Parish Council supported the proposal as the North Northumberland Coastal Communities Plan, which should take great weight in planning matters.

·       A late objection from the ecologist stating that original comments were made on 31/03/22 with no objection to planning conditions, however they had since submitted an objection as they had been recently contacted by a consultant ecologist who had identified evidence of protected species on land. Therefore, considering new information there was a strong possibility that the proposed development may result in the loss of important foraging and habitat for the protected species.
To fully consider the impact, a re-assessment was required.

·       Following the late objection from the ecologist, the applicant responded with the following information:

                                          i.         The development was designed so that substantial areas of grassland were being retained, providing a fenced area of undisturbed land.

                                         ii.         The mitigation within the application documents was considered appropriate by the County Ecologist.

                                       iii.         The proposed mitigation included a requirement for a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for Biodiversity to be submitted and approved prior to commencement of the works. The CEMP provided the opportunity for any changes in the protected species to be considered.

                                       iv.         The site was sufficiently large enough to accommodate any minor changes which may be required such as the relocation of the package treatment plant.

·       Following the rebuttal from the applicant, the Planning Officer contacted the ecologist who had advised that a further assessment of the site was required.

·       A further reason for refusal was announced as follows: “Reason 5 - Insufficient information in regard to an up-to-date ecology survey has been provided. The application cannot be determined until further details have been submitted and adequate mitigation, where necessary, is provided. Due to the lack of further information the proposal is considered to be unacceptable and not in accordance with policy ENV 2 of the Northumberland Local Plan, policy 3 of the North Northumberland Coast Neighbourhood Plan and paragraph 182 of the NPPF.”

Councillor Castle raised a Point of Order explaining that the update provided was very long and that he could not absorb and would not be able to recall all of the information which formed the update from the Planning Officer and felt that he would not be able to make a decision without having the update in front of him and being given time to read and consider the information. Councillor Renner-Thompson agreed and stated that even with the information being circulated beforehand, members could not be able to make a decision without the ecology survey on the protected species being complete.

Councillor Hill proposed to defer the application, so that the information provided as an update could be circulated to all members to have time to consider prior to the next meeting, it was noted that further time may also allow time for a further ecology report to be completed. This was seconded by Councillor Castle.

A vote was taken and was it was unanimously 
 
RESOLVED that the application was DEFERRED for the further information provided as an update to be circulated to members prior to the next meeting, it was noted that further time may also allow time for a further ecology report to be completed.