Agenda item

The planning application was for the erection of 33 dwellings and the associated access on the land to the south of Oakdale Avenue, Stanground.

The main considerations were:

·         Principle of development

·         Connections to other developments within the urban design

·         Layout, design and amenity provision

·         Highway safety and parking

·         Contamination

·         Archaeology

·         Drainage

·         Developer contributions

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

The Head of Development and Construction provided an overview of the application and raised the following key points:

·         The proposal was contrary to policy in three ways.

·         The development site was allocated for employment use. It was considered acceptable for residential development as the site comprised less that 0.5% of the employment use allocation and, as such, its loss would not be of significant detriment.

·         The proposal would not provide any affordable housing contribution. £200,000 of the Section 106 funding would instead contribute to the building of a sports pavilion, which had been identified as a high priority. The entire of the Cardea scheme had already provided 251 units of affordable housing.

·         The site did not make provision for any open space, however the site was adjacent to a play area. It was considered that there was no merit in requesting further additional open space be provided.

The Committee discussed their concerns regarding the lack of affordable housing. The Head of Development and Construction clarified that £200,000 that would have been allocated by the Council to affordable housing provision, would now be allocated to the provision of a sports pavilion. As such, the same level of contribution would be made by the applicant, however the priorities for its use had been differently evaluated.

The Committee were satisfied with the development proposals and were content that where departures from Council policy occurred, it was not to significant detriment.

A motion was proposed and seconded to agree that permission be granted, as per officer recommendation. The motion was carried, nine voting in favour, one abstaining from voting.

RESOLVED: (nine voted in favour, one abstained from voting) that planning permission is GRANTED subject to the signing of a LEGAL AGREEMENT and the conditions set out in the reports.

Reasons for the decision

Subject to the imposition of the attached conditions, the proposal was acceptable having been assessed in the light of all material considerations, including weighing against relevant policies of the development plan and specifically:

?       whilst the proposal would result in the loss of an allocated employment site, as set out in Policy SA9.2 of the Peterborough Site Allocations DPD (2012), the most up-to-date monitoring report identifies that the loss of 1.2 hectares would still ensure an adequate supply of land to meet the plan-period, in accordance with Policy CS3 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011);

?       the application site was considered an appropriate location for residential development which would provide good connections to the wider South Stanground Urban Extension, in accordance with Policies CS1 and CS16 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011);

?       the layout and design of the proposal would provide an acceptable quality of public realm which would mirror the existing wider development of Cardea, in accordance with Policy CS16 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011) and Policy PP2 of the Peterborough Planning Policies DPD (2012);

?       the proposal would afford an acceptable level of amenity for future occupants, in accordance with Policy PP4 of the Peterborough Planning Policies DPD (2012);

?       the proposed layout would provide safe access for all users and adequate parking provision would be provided for occupants, in accordance with Policy CS14 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011) and Policies PP12 and PP13 of the Peterborough Planning Policies DPD (2012);

?       subject to appropriate remediation, the site would not pose any unacceptable risk to human health, in accordance with paragraph 121 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and Policy PP20 of the Peterborough Planning Policies DPD (2012);

?       the site had already been subject to archaeological evaluation and owing to the presence of building previously in situ, it was considered that there is little potential for undiscovered remains, in accordance with paragraph 128 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), Policy CS17 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011) and Policy PP17 of the Peterborough Planning Policies DPD (2012);

?       the proposed drainage strategy would accord with that which has been approved for the wider western half of the Cardea development and the proposal would not be at unacceptable risk from flooding, in accordance with paragraph 100 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) and Policy CS22 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011);

?       the Applicant has agreed to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement to secure a financial contribution towards the infrastructure demands generated by the proposal, in accordance with Policies CS12 and CS13 of the Peterborough Core Strategy DPD (2011) and the Peterborough Planning Obligations Implementation Scheme SPD (2010).