Issue - meetings

BN/39/20/PL, Land adjacent to Tars Farm House, Church Lane, Barnham PO22 0DB

Meeting: 02/09/2020 - Planning Committee (Item 176)

176 BN/39/20/PL, Land adjacent to Tars Farm House, Church Lane, Barnham PO22 0DB pdf icon PDF 436 KB

Minutes:

            Public Speakers:      Barnham & Eastergate Parish Council

                                                Mr G. Fields, Objector

                                                Mr P. Barry, Agent

 

            (Prior to consideration of this application, Councillor Ms Thurston had declared a personal interest and remained in the meeting and took part in the debate and vote.)

 

            BN/39/20/PL – Erection of 4 No. dwellings & associated works.  This application is a departure from the Development Plan, Land adjacent to Tars Farm House, Church Lane, Barnham

 

            The Committee received a report on the detail of this application from the Principal Planner, together with an officer report update which provided additional information relating to refuse collection; surface water drainage from the site; and the need for an additional condition in respect of the control of new ground and floor levels across the site.

 

            In considering the proposal, the Committee participated in a full debate.  Some Members expressed their opposition as it was felt that the rural character of the area would be lost; the lane was not suitable for the additional traffic that would be generated; the sloping nature of the plot was of concern; doubts were expressed about the drainage measures to be put in place; and comment was made that the requirement for an odour assessment and mitigation measures to address the odour from the nearby stables was not practical. 

 

            However, other Members acknowledged that the Council’s position with regard to the current 5 year Housing Land Supply deficit meant that all housing development in the district was needed to address the shortfall.  Regret was expressed that, whilst there were issues with the proposal, there were no planning reasons to refuse it.  The Principal Planning Officer was commended for his work on the application and for the comprehensive conditions that would be attached to any approval.

 

            The Principal Planning Officer addressed issues raised by Members in the course of the debate, following which the Committee

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be approved as detailed in the report and the officer report update.