Issue - meetings

Land South Of Aldcliffe Hall Lane, Lancaster, Lancashire

 

 

Meeting: 09/01/2017 - Planning Regulatory Committee (Item 117)

117 Land South Of Aldcliffe Hall Lane, Lancaster, Lancashire pdf icon PDF 297 KB

Outline application for erection of up to 11 dwellings with associated access for Mr M Mister

Minutes:

A10

16/01226/OUT

Outline application for erection of up to 11 dwellings with associated access for Mr M Mister

Scotforth West Ward

   R

 

Under the scheme of public participation, John Rollins, Chris Norman, Tim Dant, Janet Taylor, Nicholas Webster and Emma Wolstencroft spoke in objection to the application. Graham Salisbury of Graham Anthony Associates, agent for the applicant, spoke in support.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Robert Redfern and seconded by Councillor Margaret Pattison:

 

“That the application be refused.”

 

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the proposition, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.

 

Resolved:

 

That Outline Planning Permission be refused for the following reasons:

 

1.

In order to achieve adequate visibility at the site's point of access, to create a safe and appropriate means of access and safe refuge for pedestrians, extensive works and hedge removal would be required which would overly-urbanise this stretch of rural road and the locality in general, to the detriment of the existing hamlet and surrounding rural landscape. The proposal is therefore contrary to the aims and objectives of the NPPF, in particular the Core Planning Principles and Sections 7 and 11, saved policy E4 of the Lancaster District Local Plan and policies DM28, DM35, DM41 and DM42 of the Development Management Development Plan Document.

 

2.

By reason of the site's predominantly elevated position to the south of the existing settlement, and the area occupied by the proposal, the development will appear overly-prominent, poorly related to the hamlet, conflicting with the natural grain of the low coastal drumlins and as a consequence will unacceptably encroach on the countryside to the detriment of the character and appearance of the landscape. The proposal is therefore contrary to the NPPF, in particular the Core Principles and Section 11, saved policy E4 of the Lancaster District Local Plan, policies DM28, DM35, DM41 and DM42 of the Development Management Development Plan Document.