14.1 [Reference] 14/00677/OUT Outline application to develop former Bramcote Hills Golf Course (part), all matters reserved except for access from Deddington Lane, for use as a continuing care retirement and specialist care community consisting of accommodation units comprising up to 38 x 2 bed bungalows, 4 x 1 bed bungalows, 40 x 1 bed assisted care units and 18 x 1 bed flats together with specialist care/ancillary communal facilities
Former Bramcote Hills Golf Course, Thoresby Road, Bramcote NG9 3EP
The application sought outline planning permission for a continuing care retirement and specialist care community comprising up to 100 dwellings.
The Committee was referred to the summary of late items which included amended wording to two conditions and various emails from residents.
Mr Steve Beck, representing the Bramcote Hills Open Space Protection Group (objecting), Mr Ian Radmore (objecting) and Councillor John Doddy, ward member for Bramcote, addressed the Committee prior to the general debate.
The Committee debated the item and the following comments were noted:
- The merits of the application were noted although residents’ concerns were understood.
- The ‘public space’ which was the subject of the application was not open to the public in any event.
- There was a shortage of suitable housing for the over 55s and development of the site in the manner envisaged could potentially make houses available for occupation by families.
- References and comparisons made in the report to the Hempshill Hall site were not considered to be particularly relevant since the Hempshill Hall site had not been in the Green Belt. Bramcote was different – many objections had been received from local residents.
- The fears of local residents regarding traffic were noted.
- It was disputed that costs would be awarded against the Council if the officer recommendation was overturned by the Committee and any subsequent appeal launched by the applicants was lost by the Council. It was stated that the Planning Inspector would place great weight on an elected member’s representation of his or her constituents’ views and Councillor Doddy, in speaking as ward member, had unequivocally represented the views of residents who were opposed to the proposed development.
- It was considered that the application was premature since Bramcote had an emerging Neighbourhood Plan and residents should have the right to say what went into their Neighbourhood Plan.
- It was considered there were strong technical environmental grounds to refuse the application due to the land’s designation as a wildlife corridor.
- The argument regarding the Council’s five year housing land supply was not considered to be a meritorious factor in supporting the application since the supply was currently 4.5 years’ supply and it was anticipated this would increase due to economic factors.
- The site was poorly served by public transport.
At the conclusion of debate, and prior to members voting on the application, the Director of Legal and Planning Services issued a costs warning and stated that, should members refuse the application contrary to officer advice, the Planning Inspector was likely to give significant weight to the five year land supply issue. RESOLVED that the application be refused. The Director of Legal and Planning Services requested that, in light of members having voted against the officer recommendation, they should agree to summarise the Committee’s reasons for the vote. The meeting adjourned for a number of minutes to allow officers to prepare an appropriate form of wording which is set out in the reasons below and was voted in favour of by members of the Committee.
Reasons Whilst acknowledging that the Council does not have a five year land supply, the proposed development would have an adverse impact on the open and undeveloped nature of the site detracting from the visual amenity that the Bramcote Ridge and Bramcote Hills as a whole provides in this built up area. Accordingly, the development would conflict with the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy 16 of the Broxtowe Aligned Core Strategy (2014) and Policies E12, E13, RC5 and RC16 of the Broxtowe Local Plan. Councillors M Handley and L A Ball BEM requested that their votes in favour of the application be noted.