Agenda item

Hybrid application, outline development 3.8ha of land (approximately 116 dwellings) (all matters reserved) and full planning application for the erection of 84 dwellings with associated access, infrastructure, landscaping and car parking and access (amended description).

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding a hybrid application for outline development of 3.8ha of land (approximately 116 dwellings) (all matters reserved) and full planning application for the erection of 84 dwellings with associated access, infrastructure, landscaping and car parking and access (amended description) on land on the north east side of Cross Lane, Sacriston (for copy see file of Minutes).

S Pilkington, Senior Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the application which included a site location plan, aerial photograph, site photographs, detailed and indicative layouts and proposed house types.  Members of the Committee had visited the site the previous day and were familiar with the location and setting.

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that one additional letter had been received which expressed concerns at the number of housing units proposed.

Mr A McVickers, agent for the applicant, addressed the Committee.

It was important in order to meet current and future housing needs that residential development continued to be brought forward and delivered across the region within the interim period during which the Emerging County Durham Plan was being progressed.

Despite the National and county wide objective of boosting significantly the supply of housing it was also equally important that on a local level the right sites, which were appropriate and sustainable in nature, came forward to form the housing supply.  This was of greater concern in light of the current 5 year housing land supply position increasing the potential for speculative applications on less sustainable sites.

The applicant felt it appropriate to bring forward this application ahead of the emerging plan as through evidence based documents such as the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment and Sustainability Appraisals, which remain as material considerations, the Council highlighted this site as a suitable and sustainable development site unconstrained by greenbelt designation, which should come forward in the short term.

The application site was identified as part of a wider site incorporating land parcels to the north as a draft housing allocation for circa 370 dwellings within the submission version of the former County Durham Plan.  This application, in light of the Plan’s revocation, sought to deliver approximately 50% of these dwellings as a conscious effort to strike a balance by proposing what the applicant believed was a suitable scale of development for the site in the current Local planning policy climate.

The scheme proposed the delivery of 200 new homes providing an excellent range and choice of 3 and 4 bed properties ranging from 739sq.ft up to 1,275 sq.ft ensuring that the development would meet the housing needs of a wide range of the market whilst also providing onsite, a full policy compliant 15% affordable housing provision.

The hybrid approach to the application of securing 84 dwellings in detail with a further 116 in outline had been utilised to grant greater flexibility in the housing mix for later phases to allow the applicant to more easily reflect market demands in the type and size of homes proposed in the later phases through Reserved Matter applications rather than having to vary the existing permission.  The incorporation of an 84 unit detailed element to the application represented the applicant’s commitment to develop the site by facilitating the commencement of development as early as possible.

Throughout the planning application process the applicant had worked closely with the planning officer to address any and all issues and concerns that had arisen from local residents, statutory and internal consultees.  Amendments to the house type selection and site layout had resulted from these discussions ensuring that the development was of a high design quality which would deliver a visually attractive housing scheme set within a legible site layout and green infrastructure framework.  Further to this the applicant had provided additional assessments in regards to Air Quality, Noise, Transport, Drainage and Ecology to guarantee that the application fully assessed and mitigated against all impact receptors, such that that were no outstanding objections from any internal or statutory consultees and therefore confirming that there were no technical reasons why the application should not be approved.

In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework the application should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development.  The development did not result in any adverse impacts which would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits listed by the case officer within his report nor were there any specific policies within the NPPF that indicated development should be restricted.  As such the applicant requested that committee members support the officers’ recommendation to approve this application such that the benefits of the development could be realised.

Councillor Clare informed the Committee that he considered the development would have a residual landscape harm.  However, there was insufficient to refuse the application in light of the strategic housing land availability assessment and the planning officer’s recommendation.  Councillor Clare moved approval of the application.

Councillor Wilkes informed the Committee that areas near to the site had experienced extreme flooding incidents and hoped that the mitigation proposed was sufficient.  Councillor Wilkes also asked whether there was any provision proposed for public art from the application.

Councillor Shield considered that the application should be considered under NPPF Part 14 and in seconding approval of the application added under the previous spatial policy the site was considered to be outside the settlement boundary for Sacriston.

Councillor Richardson informed the Committee that he could not support approval of the application due to the resulting loss of agricultural land.

Councillor Tinsley informed the developer that he was disappointed with the hybrid nature of the application which could result in some of the site being developed and some not.

The senior Planning Officer, in responding to Councillor Wilkes, informed the Committee that drainage proposals for the site had been considered suitable by Drainage and Coastal Protection.  Additionally, the need for a scheme for the provision of public art on the site was included at Condition 18 of the permission.

Upon a vote being taken it was

Resolved:

That the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure the provision of:

·         13 on site affordable units in phase 1.

·         15% on site affordable housing units on phase 2.

·         £200,000 towards open space and sporting provision within the Electoral Division.

·         Provision of pedestrian/cycle multi user route to Brookside/Morningside Close.

and the conditions contained in the report.