Decision Maker: Planning Committee
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Councillor Prowse declared a prejudicial interest in the above application and left the meeting.
The Committee considered a report by the Senior Planning Officer (circulated previously).
RESOLVED that the meeting be adjourned for 2 minutes to enable the officer to obtain a glass of water.
RESOLVED that the meeting be reconvened.
The Senior Corporate and Community Services Officer read out 2 statements received from Cathie Hamilton and Sue Prosper, Love Braunton (objectors) to the Committee.
Ruth McDonough (objector), Gary Baddick (applicant) and Robert Cocker (agent) addressed the Committee.
In response to questions, the Senior Planning officer advised the following:
· The Highways Officer from Devon County Council was unable to attend the meeting.
· The Lawful Development Certificate had been approved which lawfully permitted the movement of vehicles from the site.
· If the application was refused and challenged at appeal, it was likely that the appeal would be lost as the Lawful Development Certificated has been granted.
· Details of the materials had now been provided and included within the report. The conditions had been amended to reflect the change in materials.
· Overhead power cables was a matter for consideration by the developer and the applicant would be required to liaise with the appropriate utility provider.
· The scheme was of a modern design. It was considered that the visual impact would not be harmful to the character of the locality.
· The transport assessment detailed the number of vehicle movements which had been agreed.
· The dispute regarding the joint party boundary hedge was a civil matter.
In response to questions, the Senior Solicitor and Monitoring Officer advised the following:
· The liability to and payment of Business Rates and Council Tax were useful indicators but were not determining factors in the consideration of applications for Lawful Development Certificates. The major consideration was the evidence provided as to the established use of the land.
· Lawful Development Certificates could be revoked however this was only in rare circumstances if it became clear that the evidence that had been presented was false.
· The evidence that had been presented was for the storage of materials.
In response to questions, the Lead Planning Officer (MB) advised the following:
· That the site was within the development boundary of Braunton.
· It was considered that the application was acceptable in terms of the visual impact, scale, Planning Policy DM04 and the National Planning Policy Framework as detailed in the report.
RESOLVED (6 for, 3 against and 1 abstained) that the application be APPROVED as recommended by the Senior Planning Officer.
Report author: Steve Emery
Publication date: 21/09/2021
Date of decision: 08/09/2021
Decided at meeting: 08/09/2021 - Planning Committee