Agenda item

Construction of 33 houses and associated carriageway, footway and landscaping.

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding the construction of 33 houses and associated carriageway, footway and landscaping at land to the east of Fairfalls Terrace, New Brancepeth (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Senior Planning Officer provided the Committee with a detailed presentation which included photographs of the site and a plan of the proposed layout. Members of the Committee had visited the site and were familiar with the location and setting.

Members were advised that should the application be approved, conditions 3, 4 and 5 could all be removed as all requirements had been met in advance by the applicant.

Condition no.2 would need updating to reflect the removal of conditions 3, 4 and 5.

In referring to paragraph 76 of the report, the Senior Planning Officer advised that a condition would no longer be required as a suitable plan had been submitted which the Highways Authority was satisfied with.

Councillor D Bell, local Member, addressed the Committee. He advised that there were issues at the area regarding surface water as there were broken field drains on the site. Due to modifications made by a local farmer, flooding issues had been caused. However Councillor Bell was aware that a drainage plan had been resubmitted by the applicant and to the satisfaction of Northumbrian Water.

Members were advised that new housing was needed in the area and the proposed development would provide an opportunity for rent to buy properties.

Mr Ashcroft, local resident, addressed the Committee. He advised that the main reason he had originally objected to the application was the fear and worry that the developer had not submitted detailed drainage plans which could therefore result in making the flood risk greater for local residents. However Mr Little now acknowledged that the developers had submitted plans which met the approval of Northumbrian Water.

Mr Ashcroft felt the developer should have had the courtesy for the sake of public relation, to have involved the residents in the planning preparation to alleviate their fears about the proposals.

Mr Little, local resident, addressed the Committee. Members were advised that the drainage plans would involve major works, transport disruption, interruption of access and access to private land, however residents had not been afforded the opportunity to raise concerns because the drainage plans had been submitted too late.

Members were advised that the drainage scheme would not cope with surface water and subsequent sewage problems as increased sewerage from the proposed development would potentially cause overflow for manhole 1606.

Mr Little believed that there were specific impacts of the proposed developments which did not appear to have been properly addressed, such as road safety in winter, access and road safety during construction and a lack of sustainability. Mr Ashcroft advised that the removal of the roadside hedge on the west boundary and the construction of stone gabions on the south boundary, would clearly have a negative impact on the visual amenity. Furthermore, Members were advised that the stone gabions were contrary to the recommendations of the Ecology report.

The Senior Planning Officer responded to the points raised as follows:-

Drainage Plans – the developer had provided the drainage plans up front rather than it having to be conditioned as part of a planning permission. Northumbrian Water had confirmed it was satisfied with the plans.

Mr C Smith, applicant, addressed the Committee. While he apologised for the rushed last minute submission of the drainage plans, he too highlighted that the plans were not actually required at the current stage, however the developer felt it prudent to produce the plans up front because of resident concerns.

Members were advised of the technicalities of the drainage scheme and drainage requirements and that the proposals should mitigate all issues of surface water. Only a narrow pipe would need to be installed at a depth of 1 metre, as such the installation would cause minimal disruption.

Mr Smith highlighted that all consultees were satisfied with the proposals and Members were advised that while it was regrettable that a boundary hedge would be removed, that would be mitigated against with new hedges at other boundaries.

In response to a query from Councillor Kay, Mr Smith clarified the location of the combined drain and advised that on site storage was for surface water only.

In response to a query from Councillor Conway, the Senior Planning Officer clarified that there were no contaminates on site.

Councillor Conway was disappointed that no affordable housing was to be provided and requested that more detailed text be provided in officer reports regarding viability and affordability/

Seconded by Councillor Lethbridge, Councillor Kay moved that the application be approved.

Resolved: “That the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed within the report, with condition 2 to be amended to reflect the removal of conditions 3, 4 and 5”.

Councillor M Davinson and Councillor G Bleasdale left the meeting.