Agenda item

Construction of 55 residential dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping and engineering works (outline, all matters reserved except access).

The Senior Planning Officer, Henry Jones gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned planning application, copies of which had been circulated (for copy see file of minutes).  Members noted that the written report was supplemented by a visual presentation which included photographs of the site. 

The application was for construction of 55 residential dwellings with associated infrastructure, landscaping and engineering works (outline, all matters reserved except access) and was recommended for approval subject to a Section 106 Agreement and conditions.

Members noted that an application for this site had been approved by Committee in September 2015, however, as there were number of changes made in terms of the application it was felt that the application should be brought back before Members for determination.  Councillors were informed that the application site was adjacent to another development that was almost completed, “The Limes” and that the indicative layout for this application site had not changed from the one presented to Members and approved in September 2015.  Members were referred to photographs highlighting the adjacent development and the proposed point of access to the proposed development.

The Committee noted that there had been no objections from the majority of the statutory or internal consultees on the application, subject to the conditions set out in the report.  It was noted there had been representation from the Landscape and Sustainability Sections, noting potential adverse landscape and visual effects, potential impacts upon ecology and the distance from services, facilities and public transport.  Members noted there had been concerns raised by Coxhoe Parish Council, as summarised in the report and in addition, the Chairman of the Parish Council was in attendance to address the Committee.   Members noted 9 letters of objection from the members of the public, a summary of the main points raised being set out in the report.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that the approval in September 2015 had been subject to a Section 106 Agreement to secure 40% affordable housing on the site, however, the applicant now proposed that this 40% be offered via the “Prince Bishops Model” as an alternative to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) compliant affordable housing.  Members were asked to note that NPPF Paragraph 14 referred to a balance between the adverse impact of development and the benefits of a development and that in this case Officers felt that the benefits in assisting towards a 5 year housing supply and provision of a wider choice of homes were such that the application should be approved.

The Chairman asked the Local Member for Coxhoe, Councillor J Blakey to speak in relation to the Application.

Councillor J Blakey noted that she had no objection to the development, however, she noted the site was adjacent to the local community’s well loved nature reserve and added that there was an amount of £4,000 cited for contribution towards public art.  Councillor J Blakey added that there were no businesses in the area, and asked that Developer work with Coxhoe Parish Council in terms of provision in terms of education.  Councillor J Blakey added that in addition to the affordable housing provision as set out, was there any scope in terms of provision of much needed bungalows within the development.

The Chairman thanked the Local Member and introduced Councillor S Dunn, Chairman of Coxhoe Parish Council to speak in relation application.

Parish Councillor S Dunn noted the Officer’s report referred to the education provision and a Section 106 Agreement.  It was noted that Coxhoe Primary School was full and the construction of an additional 3 classrooms by Durham County Council had been welcomed.

However, Parish Councillor S Dunn noted that these additional classes were to accommodate the additional pupils in terms of developments that had already gained planning permission and did not take into account developments that had come about since that time, including the application being considered today. 

Parish Councillor S Dunn noted that the £70,000 in terms of school places be retained, however, if taken in the context of around 1,064 new properties approved for development in the Bowburn and Coxhoe area, this would equate to a shortfall of primary school places of between 180 to 360.  Parish Councillor S Dunn suggested that the situation was at a critical mass such that there was a need for a new primary school in order to deal with the additional number of primary places required.

It was added that from previous applications for this site, the proposed number of houses had reduced in number from 100 to the 55 as set out in this application, and questioned as regards the provision of bungalows and affordable housing.  Parish Councillor S Dunn noted the context of the Parish Plans 1 and 2 that were in place.

The Chairman thanked Parish Councillor S Dunn and asked Mr S Jackson from Prince Bishops Homes to speak in support of the application, having 5 minutes to address the Committee.

Mr S Jackson noted he was a Development Consultant for Prince Bishops Homes, part of Derwentside Homes.  Mr S Jackson added that the purpose of the Prince Bishops Model was to be able to provide low-cost home ownership, with a rent moving to buy model aimed at “generation rent”, those aged 20-mid 30s, with jobs however with little or no deposit or credit.  It was added that the model was for 4 years at market rent, not as per the 20% gap of “affordable rent”, and following this period occupants would be offered the opportunity to purchase the property, retaining 50% of any increase in the value of the property to use towards costs, such as fees and a deposit.  Mr S Jackson noted that financial advisors would help to ensure potential purchasers were “mortgage ready” and there were initiatives such as saving towards a deposit via the Prince Bishops Community Bank.  Mr S Jackson added that lettings would be in line with the Council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) in terms of those within Central Durham initially, then for the wider Durham market.  It was added that any profits from sales would be put back into social housing via Derwentside Homes and that discussions were ongoing with the Planning Department in terms of the model being NPPF compliant.  Mr S Jackson added that an opinion was sought by Prince Bishops Homes in terms of its model and Mr R Sagar, Solicitor had the opinion that the model was NPPF compliant.  Mr S Jackson noted that the Prince Bishops Model was preferable to Government schemes as it allowed people to get housing immediately and then work towards being able to purchase their home.  It was added that likely changes from Government in terms of the budget would mean that affordable rent would no longer be sustainable. 

Mr S Jackson concluded by noting that there were a number of bungalows within the scheme and there were no proposal to change this.

The Chairman thanked Mr S Jackson and asked the Senior Planning Officer to provide further information on the issues raised.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that developments already agreed in the Bowburn and Coxhoe area had already secured financial contributions in respect of education provision and the comments within the report by the School Organisation Manager were in the context of the other schemes in the area. 

The Chairman asked Members of the Committee for their questions and comments on the application.

Councillor A Hopgood noted that the proposal seemed to be a good scheme, however, felt the number of additional primary school places being financial compensated for, 6 was too few.  Councillor A Hopgood added that there was the additional pressure in terms of any older children and secondary school places, and of those children that would attend primary and then eventually require secondary school places.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that the financial contribution sought, equating to 6 primary school places, was based upon the comments received from the School Organisation Manager on what they thought would be needed.

Councillor P Conway noted permission had been granted previously for development at this site and asked whether that approval had an agreement in terms of a financial contribution towards school places.  The Senior Planning Officer noted the same condition in terms of the approximate £70,000 for 6 places had also been in the previous application.  The Solicitor - Planning and Development, N Carter clarified that the previous application had been approved, however the Section 106 Agreement had not been issued, however, the application was back at Committee for Members’ consideration.  Councillor P Conway asked if the Committee could be assured that the £70,000 for education provision would be secured.  The Senior Planning Officer noted that it would only be to stipulate that the issue be reviewed at the Reserved Matters stage taking into account the number of properties. 

Councillor P Conway noted he had some concern in terms of paragraphs 141 and 142 of the report with reference to affordable housing provision.  Councillor P Conway noted that while the 40% offered within the application would allow a “foot on the ladder” for some people, once these properties were sold, they would be lost from the affordable housing provision in the future.  The Senior Planning Officer noted that there was a debate in terms of whether the 40% offered equated to NPPF compliant housing, with the applicant of the opinion it was, and the Council of the opinion it was not.  Councillor P Conway noted that if the Local Member and Parish Council were happy and the contribution towards education provision would be in place then he would be happy to support the recommendation. 

The Senior Planning Officer noted that as the application had been required to come back to Committee, a further consultation period had been in effect and no further comments had been received since the September 2015 approval.

Councillor J Lethbridge noted he had reflected upon the comments made by Councillor J Blakey and Parish Councillor S Dunn and understood the sense of encroachment.

Councillor J Lethbridge noted he was a supporter of this area, having spend a lot of time in his childhood in the area and valued the unique landscape of the limestone running from Cassop Vale through to the coast.  Councillor J Lethbridge added that he recalled the beauty and ecology of the landscape and the murmuring of innumerable bees and noted this was under threat by the march of house-building, noting housed-building had replaced industries such as coal mining and quarrying.

Councillor A Bell noted he was not convinced that the 40% offered via the Prince Bishops Model was better than NPPF compliant homes adding that in the current turbulent economic times it was unlikely house prices would rise and therefore the 50% of any increase in value would be 50% of zero and if the rent remained at 20% above “affordable rent” then this could have an impact upon those renting the properties in the longer term.  Councillor A Bell noted that he felt he could not support the recommendation.

Councillor M Davinson moved that the application be approved; he was seconded by Councillor J Lethbridge.

RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED subject to the Section 106 Agreement and conditions detailed in the Officer’s report to the Committee.