Agenda item

Councillor Harrington left the Committee meeting.

The planning application was for a residential development on the land to the west of Williams Close, Newborough comprising 42 dwellings, access, associated works and landscaping.

The main considerations were:

·         The Principle of Development;

·         Highway Implications;

·         Design and Layout;

·         Landscape Implications;

·         Ecological Implications;

·         Flood Risk and Drainage;

·         Section 106 Legal Agreement;

·         Other Matters.

It was officer’s recommendation that planning permission be granted subject to the signing of a legal agreement and conditions.

The Planning and Development Manager provided an overview of the application and raised the following points:

·         The open space outlined in the application was the only part of the site in flood zone 2.

·         A viability assessment had been submitted, suggesting the proposal would not be viable with affordable housing. As such, none was to be provided.

·         Ground works for the proposal would raise the site by one metre.

·         Two letters of support had been received and 24 letters of objection. Most of these highlighted the principle of development, the agricultural nature of the land, the proposed access, loss of privacy and drainage.

·         Highways officers had objected to the access off Soke Road, for seven residences, advising that the road required widening. The applicant had not considered this necessary.

·         The roads within the proposal site had been widened to comply with policy.

·         It was considered that plot 20 would have an overbearing impact on Williams Close, however the significant separation distance meant that that it was acceptable, on balance.

·         The applicant had relocated the footpath on Soke Road. This did not alter the Highways objection, however the proposal was still considered acceptable.

Councillor Harrington, Ward Councillor, addressed the Committee and responded to questions from Members. In summary the key points highlighted included:

·         This was an on balance decision that needed to be made.

·         Plot 20 would have an overbearing impact on Williams Close.

·         A one metre raising of the site was significant and land shrinkage may result.

·         Flooding would be an issue if the land was raised. The land surrounding the site would flood as a result, as has happened before with other, similar sites.

·         Soke Road was a narrow road and caused problems for residents. There had been fatalities and more work needed to be carried out to make access to the site safe.

·         On balance, Councillor Harrington was not happy with the proposal and asked the Committee to refuse it as more detail was needed and it would result in overbearing impact.

Mr Paul Fowler, Parish Councillor, addressed the Committee in objection to the application and responded to questions from Members. In summary the key points highlighted included:

·         A hedgerow had not been included on the site plan and this suggested that the proposals had not been fully considered.

·         It was believed that the attitude the applicant presented towards Soke Road was concerning, as they had ignored suggestions to make the road safer. Seven residences using the accesses off Soke Road was significant.

·         Williams Close would be overlooked by the proposals as they are currently.

·         The Highways recommendations had not been considered.

Mr Nigel Ozier, Agent, addressed the Committee in support of the application and responded to questions from Members. In summary the key points highlighted included:

·         There had been a lot of work carried out to get to this position. The applicant had met with the Parish Council twice and has been willing to amend the proposals as a result.

·         A viability assessment had been undertaken to establish the Section 106 contributions, although the contribution figure in the report was questioned.

·         Only seven houses would access the site from Soke Road so the volume of traffic would not significantly increase. However, the footpath has been altered so residents will not need to walk on the road.

·         The general consensus from consultation was that the area did not flood. This situation would not change as the road would remain higher than the land.

·         The design of plot 20 had been altered and met with the required standards. Only 1 landing window faced on to Williams Close.

The Senior Engineer advised that comment had been made on the application regarding the narrowness of Soke Road. The road was well used by vehicles and pedestrians. The road was sub-standard and the addition of more traffic caused the Highways officers to object. A solution was offered to the applicant, where one access was provided off the widened road, however this was not taken up.

The Committee raised concerns regarding the Highways implications of the proposals and that the applicant had not taken into account the comments of Highways officers. The loss of amenity for Williams Close residents was discussed and considered as an important issue, which should be altered.

The potential for flooding on the site and the land surrounding the site was discussed. The Planning and Development Manager clarified that no objections had been raised from the relevant bodies that had been consulted.

The Planning and Highways Lawyer advised that if the Committee were minded to defer the application any such motion would need to be clear on the precise grounds that the decision was being deferred.

A motion was proposed and seconded to defer the application for further consideration of the Soke Road access, loss of amenity for residents of Williams Close and to examine the viability of the proposal. The motion was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: (unanimous) that planning permission is DEFERRED.

Reasons for the decision

To consider the Soke Road access and the alternative suggestions of the Highways Authority.

To consider the loss of amenity for residents of Williams Close.

To examine the viability of the proposal with regard to the Section 106 Legal Agreement and the provision of affordable housing.