Permeable hardstanding at Land at St Georges Road, New Mills

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for engineering works and permeable hardstanding on an approximately 542-square-metre site.

“Retrospective planning permission is sought for engineering works and permeable hardstanding. The site covers an area of approximately 542sqm.”

Officer report

The site and its history

The site was formerly grassed land, is now rubble hardstanding, lies within New Mills’ settlement boundary and has no recorded planning history.

“The site to which the application relates refers to a square parcel of land which previously comprised an open area of grassed land and now consists of broken brick and stone rubble hardstanding. The site is accessed off an unnamed private track off St Georges Rd.”

“The application site lies within the defined settlement boundary of New Mills which Local Plan Policy S2 designates as a Market Town.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the works were considered acceptable in principle without significant harm to amenity, highway safety or the street scene.

“In conclusion the proposals are deemed to be acceptable in principle. There would be no significant adverse impacts upon visual and residential amenity or highway safety. The proposals would not have an unacceptable design or result in adverse harm to the street scene in accordance with the relevant planning polices set out in the High Peak Local Plan (2016), Supplementary Planning documents and the NPPF. Consequently, the application is recommended for approval.”

“A. That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions outlined below:”

Officer report

What consultees and residents said

Five members of the public made six objections, while the town council, highways authority and Tree Officer raised no objection.

“Six objections from five members of the public have been received who have raised the following concerns:”

“Derbyshire County Council highways (No objection)”

Officer report

Who spoke

A speaker addressed the committee in objection to the application.

What members debated

Members expressed concern about the site’s poor visual appearance and harm to its previous biodiversity, and heard the retrospective BNG explanation.

“During the debate, concern was expressed regarding the poor visual appearance of the site and the negative impact of the development on the previous biodiversity of the site and the Planning Officer advised that as the application is retrospective it meets one of the exceptions to BNG under Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee resolved to refuse planning permission.

“That planning permission be refused for the following reason: a. The development is contrary to paragraph 135 of the NPPF and Policy EQ6 of the Local Plan in that the development does not add to the overall quality of the area; is not visually attractive or sympathetic to the built environment or landscape setting; does not create an attractive, welcoming space or optimise the potential of the site; or promote high standards of amenity for users; and has harmed the visual…”

Minutes