| Conditions or Reasons: | | 1)
The proposed development would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt, which is by definition harmful, and would cause harm to its openness and would conflict with one of the purposes of the Green Belt. No material considerations have been identified which clearly outweigh the harm caused to the Green Belt, and other identified harms. Consequently, 'very special circumstances' do not exist, and the development is contrary to the aims and objectives of section 13 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021; The Eaton Bray Neighbourhood Plan and Policy SP4 of the Local Plan. |
| 2)
The proposed development is partly outside of a settlement envelope and within the Green Belt. The proposed scale, design and layout of the development results in overdevelopment of the site and does not relate well to the structure and form of the village by introducing back land development. The proposals will result in a detrimental impact on landscape character, extending built development beyond the existing settlement into open countryside and into a designated Local Gap. The proposed development would cause significant harm to the open spacious character of the area in this edge of village location. It would therefore be contrary to Chapters 12,13 and 15 of the NPPF; Policy SP4, SP7, HQ1, HQ8, EE3 and EE5 of the Local Plan and Policy EB8 of the Eaton Bray Neighbourhood Plan and the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide 2014 which seeks to ensure, amongst other things, that new development is appropriate in scale to its setting. |
| 3)
The proposed development would make inadequate provision for the parking of cars and would lead to an increase in on-street parking thereby resulting in unacceptable traffic congestion and additional hazards for highway users and the residents and therefore would be contrary to Policy T2 and T3 of the CBC Local Plan, CBC Design Guide and the Eaton Bray Neighbourhood Plan. |
| 4)
The proposal by reason of its excessive scale, bulk and siting, would constitute overdevelopment development resulting in an unacceptable loss of privacy, light, outlook and cause an overbearing impact to the neighbouring dwellinghouses (namely No.86, No.96 High Street and Meadfield, The Meads) as well as an unacceptable impact to the future occupiers of the site in terms of loss of privacy between the proposed plots. This would be harmful to the residential amenity of the occupiers of surrounding properties and future occupiers. The proposal is therefore contrary to the principles of good design set out in Policy HQ1of the Local Plan, the CBC Design Guide and Section 12 of the NPPF. |
| 5)
The application has failed to evaluate the impact on surrounding trees, and that the omission of any BS 5837 : 2012 Tree Survey, Tree Constraints Plan and an Arboricultural Impact Assessment, to be used as supporting evidence in demonstrating suitable mitigation and tree protection measures, therefore raises considerable doubt that the constraints presented by adjacent trees have been adequately considered in the design process, and that the result of this is a risk of damage being incurred to the local landscape by this development. |
| 6)
No ecological information has been submitted as part of the application to demonstrate that the proposal will not impact protected species, nor has the proposal shown that the proposal would not result in a net loss in biodiversity, therefore the proposal is contrary to policies EE2 and EE3 of the Local Plan and Section 15 of the NPPF. |
|
|---|