Minutes:
The planning application before Members sought retrospective consent for the change of use of the rear portion of the garden at 93 Shepherds Hill to a hardstanding car park (permeable surface), which was annexed to the Shepherd & Dog Public House as an overspill car park that comprised of 27 car parking spaces.
Members noted that the application had been called in by Councillor Eagling on the grounds that there was a parking concern for local residents and this overflow car park alleviated heavy parking when it occurred in Shepherds Hill.
In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector with a response from the applicant’s agent.
The objector raised concerns over the nature of the application and its effect on Metropolitan Green Belt. The objector stated that there were no very special circumstances that would alleviate the harm to the green belt. Members were informed that the hardstanding surface caused disturbance from noise and car lights and attracted littering adversely affecting residential amenity. The objector also commented that the hardstanding surface did not have a soak away resulting in localised flooding of neighbouring gardens.
In response the applicant’s agent stated that the applicant had put forward substantial very special circumstances justifying development in the Green Belt. The agent stated that the site originally had a concrete surface and that the surface was permeable. The speaker stated the reason for the application was to help alleviate parking issues that existed on busy nights at the Public House.
With its agreement Councillors Alex Donald and Robert Benham addressed the Committee.
Councillor Donald commented that the development had no real impact on neighbouring properties and that there were sufficient very special circumstances to justify approving the application. The Committee was advised that the land was predominantly covered in gravel which was pre-existing. Councillor Donald disagreed that the use was out of character in the rear garden environment stating that the use alleviated parking congestion on the public highway. Councillor Donald was of the view that the use removed cars from the highway into a contained area therefore reducing noise and disturbance to local residents.
Councillor Benham commented that the Shepherd & Dog Public House had been a victim of its own success. Councillor Benham commented that he disagreed with the refusal reasons and was of the view that the benefits of the application would outweigh the potential adverse impact. Councillor Benham stated that there were no parking restrictions in Shepherds hill and when busy customers of the public house would be forced to park in neighbouring roads causing disturbance. Councillor Benham questioned who the application would adversely affect.
During the debate Members discussed the inappropriate nature of the development in the Green Belt land and whether the applicant had advanced sufficient very special circumstances to outweigh any harm. Members suggested that if the application was granted, parking restrictions should be considered on the road. Members were of the view that the application would improve highway safety and that a precedent for such already existed at Coopers Company & Coborn School. Members also noted that the site was previously used commercially. The committee received confirmation that there had not been any complaint since the site had been in operation as an overflow car park. Members were of the view that there was no material physical harm to the openness of the Green Belt and that the harm caused was outweighed by the removal of parked vehicles from the public highway improving safety and amenity.
The report recommended that planning permission be refused, however following a motion to approve planning it was RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to a condition requiring that the overspill car parking not to be used except during the licensed hours of the main premises (with the addition of a reasonable period of time for drivers to depart).
The vote for the resolution was carried by 10 votes to 1 against.
Councillor Whitney voted against the resolution.
The reason for approval was that the harm caused to the Green Belt by reason of the inappropriate development, but no material harm to openness, was outweighed by the proposal to reduce parking from the highway during busy periods to benefit safety and amenity.