We use essential cookies to make this website work. We’d also like to set additional cookies to understand how you use The Flyfords Parish Council. Read more

Skip to Content Accessiblity
The Flyfords

Our Next Meeting: 21st May, 2024

View PDF

Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting held at The Flyford’s Hall on Tuesday 6th February 2024

Present

Sadie Densham
David Rhodes
Andrew Short
Richard Davey
Linda Robinson
Mark Broughton-Taylor attended as clerk

1. Apologies

David Waide

2. Declaration of Interest

None.

3. Public Participation

The meeting was live streamed but there were 3 online participants.

There were twelve members of the public in attendance.

Pertinent comments from the public are recorded under the relevant items below.

4. Planning Matters

4.1 W/23/01034/FUL

Church Cottage
Church lane
Flyford Flavell

Amendments - Proposed extension to existing cottage and erection of new  dwelling.

The following comment was agreed:
The parish council notes the change in design but there is still insufficient information to make an informed decision. Levels and exact dimensions of the ridge height are required to ensure that the proposed property will not effect the setting and views of the church.

Proposed: A Short
Seconded: R Davey All in favour

4.2 W/23/02598/CLE

Church Farm
North Piddle

Certificate of Lawfulness for proposed use and occupation of an agricultural building as an independent dwelling house, having been completed and occupied for in excess of four years.

The following comment was agreed following subsequent discussion:
The parish council note that the conversation is for a portion of a multi use agricultural building and therefore believe that paragraph 171.B.3 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 would be more relevant. If so a 10 year period of occupation would be required before applying for a certificate of lawfulness and avoiding possible enforcement action.

5. Appeals

5.1 APP/H1840/W/23/3331154

Permission In Principle for up to 2 dwellings
Land at (OS 9778 5515) New Road Flyford Flavell

5.2 APP/H1840/W/23/3331148

Permission In Principle for up to 6 dwellings
Land at (OS 9778 5515) New Road Flyford Flavell

The members of the public were informed that comments can be made on the Wychavon website.

The following comment was agreed for both appeals:

  • The Flyford Flavell, Grafton Flyford and North Piddle Parish Council has opposed all the applications on this site and continue to maintain its position. The parish council would draw the inspector’s attention to the two comments that were made at the time of the determination. The two comments are fairly similar but do make some specific points.  
  • We would also draw attention to the considerable public interest that these applications generated. The response serves to show the depth of local concern raised by these applications. The parish council would like to emphasize the following points that have been raised in the application objections:
  • Both sites are outside the village boundary and application 23/01596 is in North Piddle not Flyford Flavell which is open countryside.
  • This is downplayed by saying development is allowed in the open countryside and quote policies. All of these policies are clearly for rural workers, farm buildings, etc where other criteria pertain and do not apply to this type of development. They have not shown that local rural workers need this type of development. 
  • Both applications develop the village in an unnatural way. These applications do not represent infill but extension of the village into open countryside.
  • The parish council does not consider that these applications are sustainable and no data has been provided to suggest they are. Locally, sewerage, broadband, footway access, school places and parking and electricity supply are already at their limit. N.B. The recent development of Flyford Green had to have LPG heating as the local grid could not support electric power for heat pumps.
  • The applicant refers to the 12-house allocation in the SWDP at Meadowcroft off Bishampton Road (recently approved as PIP) and say this proves things are sustainable. In fact, this going ahead (in principle) makes their proposal even less sustainable and adds to the excessive number of houses already approved above the allocation in the 2016 SWDP so it is the opposite argument.
  • The appellant draws attention to the application at Meadowcroft W/23/01778/PIP (referred to above) which was recently approved. The parish council also objected to this application and would like to draw the inspector’s attention to the comment that was submitted for that application.  It should also be noted that this site has been promoted in the RSWDP which has not yet been approved and is at inspection stage. It is considered that, although Wychavon planning committee felt unable to oppose this application, at the technical stage previous impediments to development on this site will still remain and it is likely to be refused. Please see the planning history for this site which goes back to 2014 and appeal APP/H1840/A/14/2221630 which was dismissed.
  • The parish council draw attention to a recent appeal APP/H1840/W/23/3326048. (Decision date 01 February 2024). This was for a PIP application approximately four miles from these sites with very similar circumstances. The appeal was dismissed.  In summary the inspector said …the proposal would not constitute sustainable development within the meaning of the Framework and this weighs very heavily against the development….there are no material considerations of such weight that indicate the proposal should be determined otherwise than in accordance with the development plan.
  • The parish council see no material difference in the sites and would expect a decision on these appeals to be consistent with this determination.
  • The parish council has a duty under the Environment Act 2021 to consider biodiversity in all its decisions. Section 40 came into force on January 1st 2024 and is now a material consideration in making comments about planning applications.
  • Flyford Flavell has a carbon footprint about three times the national average. (31 t CO2e per-household)  An explanatory note is submitted with this comment.  It can be seen that housing and transport contribute most of the carbon footprint and thus it begs the question whether Flyford Flavell is a sustainable location for further development. From an environmental point of view housing should be located in areas where the average footprint is much lower. This can be because of geographical reasons as well as many others.
  • Development of this sort is not going to enhance biodiversity in our parish.  As we have pointed out in our submission to the LPA this land has not been ploughed for many years and the pasture and hedgerows are of considerable importance to our neighbourhood.
  • When weighing up the balance between the good and harm that this application represents, the new provisions of the Environment Act need to be taken into account. Under the geographical circumstances, the very high carbon footprint of the area and the loss of bio diversity, the parish council respectfully considers that these applications fail on all accounts. No amount of mitigation, be it by high insulation levels, renewable energy or compensatory planting can compensate for the loss of the natural environment that will be caused by these applications.

6. Any Other Business

It was noted that the Smartwater kits had been ordered at £10.68 each.