Agenda and minutes

Agenda Item No.

Page No.

Application

Speaker

7

10 - 30

20/00792/FULLN

Mr Shah  (Upper Clatford Parish Council)

Mr and Mrs Barlow  (Objector)

Councillor Flood (Anna Ward)

APPLICATION NO.

20/00792/FULLN

APPLICATION TYPE

FULL APPLICATION - NORTH

REGISTERED

08.04.2020

APPLICANT

DC Li Builders

SITE

Land at Sam Whites Hill, Valley Rise, Upper Clatford, SP11 7PS  UPPER CLATFORD

PROPOSAL

Erection of six retirement dwellings, associated parking and hard and soft landscaping works

AMENDMENTS

CASE OFFICER

Ms Katie Nethersole

REFUSED for the reasons:

1.

Insufficient information has been provided in relation to waste water created from the proposed development to demonstrate that the development would achieve nutrient neutrality. Without this there would be an unreasonable likelihood of harm caused to the Solent’s protected habitats and bird species. The development thereby conflicts with policies E5 and E8 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan 2016.

2.

The proposed development would have a harmful adverse impact on the significance and setting of the affected heritage assets. The proposed dwellings would alter the existing open, domestic character and appearance of the existing site as a walled garden and would therefore lose its historic and visual connection with Bury Hill Farmhouse. Bury Hill Farmhouse is a prominent building within the Conservation Area as such there would be unacceptable harm from the proposal upon these heritage assets. Furthermore, the proposal would harm the visual transition the site currently makes between the countryside and more developed parts of the conservation area. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to policies E1, E2 and E9 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan 2016.

3.

The proposed development would result in refuse collection arrangements that would not be safe or efficient and would not comply with the minimum drag distances in conflict with the guidance as set out in the Manual for Streets. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to policy T1 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan 2016.

4.

The application has not fully assessed the proposed development and its impact on the existing trees on site. As a result of the development would lead to a loss of important trees that make a significant contribution to the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings. As such the development would therefore conflict with policies E2 and E5 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan 2016.

5.

The application has not been supported by a Preliminary Ecological Assessment to fully assess the potential impact that the development would have on biodiversity. The trees to be removed and the historic wall have the potential to support foraging and roosting bats and therefore without a full assessment it is likely that the development would have an adverse impact on these protected species. In the light of insufficient information being provided the proposal is therefore in conflict with policy E5 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan 2016.

Note to applicant:

1.

In reaching this decision Test Valley Borough Council (TVBC) has had regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. TVBC work with applicants and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 102.