Up to 7 homes at Land South Of Farmside Lane, Biddulph Moor

The site and surroundings

The site is a level strip of Green Belt farmland beside Farmside Lane, at the edge of Biddulph Moor, with open views across rural farmland.

“The site lies within the North Staffordshire Green Belt. It is a linear rectangular strip of level field, parallel to the roadside, forming part of a wider 100m stretch of undeveloped farm land between the 19 th Century Hockadilla Farm buildings, to the southwest, and a row of houses, to the northeast. The site is to the south of Farmside Lane and the outside edge of the ‘larger village’ settlement boundary that contains Biddulph Moor.”

“Farmside Lane, in this location, provides a southern edge to the settlement. The houses on the opposite side of the road, to the north, are a variety of late 1970s dwelling types that provide strong building line to the settlement.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Three earlier residential development applications for the site were withdrawn or refused between 1979 and 1987.

“79/06519/OLDDC (SMD/1979/0490) Site for Residential Development. WITHDRAWN.”

“87/00360/OLD (SMD/1987/0762) Site for Residential Development. REFUSED.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the development’s harm to the rural character, settlement setting and visual appearance would significantly outweigh its housing and community benefits.

“However, with consideration for the location and amount of the development proposed, there would be detriment to the distinctly rural character and appearance of the area and the setting of the settlement. This would be an adverse impact that would result from a ‘permission in principle’ being granted, that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits that would be associated with the development.”

“With consideration of the location and amount of development proposed, the proposed development would have a detrimental adverse impact on the visual character and appearance of the distinctly rural area and the setting of the settlement. This visual harm would be an adverse impact of granting a ‘permission in principle’ that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits that would be associated with the application proposal.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no objection in principle, while drainage and other technical matters would be considered at the later technical details stage.

“The indicative site plan drawing No. 1797 – 101 shows the creation of 7 no. access drives off Farmside Lane to serve the new dwellings. Visibility splay shall be provided for any new access / drive in line with the speed limit of the highway. If this is not achievable any future application will be refused. No objection in principle of this development.”

“Should the applicant receive planning ‘Permission in Principle’ for this proposal, United Utilities will review the drainage element of any application for Technical Details Consent in line with comments made above. It is likely at Technical Details stage that details of a sustainable surface water drainage scheme and a foul water drainage scheme would be required prior to the commencement of development.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two local residents and ward councillor John Jones spoke against the application.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed whether the proposal was infill, its design and whether it would fit the character of the area.

“Members discussed whether the proposal constituted an “infill” development, the design of the scheme, and whether it was considered to be in keeping with the character of the local area.”

“The Council’s legal representative advised members that although one of the speakers advised that the proposed development was on their land, the applicant…”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee refused the application for the reasons and policies in the report, with authority delegated for any non-substantive wording changes.

“2) That the application be REFUSED for the reasons and based on the policies contained within the report;”

“3) That in the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions / informatives / planning obligations or reasons for approval / refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Development Services be delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chair of the Committee, provided thar the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.”

Minutes