Agenda item

Outline application for the construction of up to 31 residential dwellings and associated works with all matters reserved except for access

The Senior Planning Officer, SF gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned planning application, a copy 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 Senior Planning Officer, SF advised that Members of the Committee had visited the site and were familiar with the location and setting.  The application was an outline application for the construction of up to 31 dwellings and associated works with all matters reserved except for access and was recommended for approval subject to conditions and a s106 Legal Agreement as set out within the report.

The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted that Policies EN1 and EN2 of the Saved Local Plan were of key consideration in relation to this application.  He added that the road along one side of the site was used as a “rat-run” by those avoiding the crossroad on the A68.  Members noted the relationship in terms of a nearby Listed Building and Area of High Landscape Value (AHLV).

The Committee noted that the 1997 Local Plan had identified the area as a housing site, however, this was considered out-of-date.  The Senior Planning Officer, SF explained that the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) had noted potential housing development for a larger parcel of land including the application site, though with the caveat and that access issues to be addressed.

The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted the existing road layout.  He added that the Applicant had approached the Local Planning Authority for pre-application discussions and an initial proposal of around 60 dwellings had been reduced to reflect Officer comments “up to 31”.  It was noted it was felt that issues such as drainage, SuDS and others could be dealt with at the Reserved Matters stage.  Members noted that the access arrangements were being proposed in detail within this application and the Highways Section had no objections, subject to conditions and informatives relating to adoptable construction standards.

Members noted Northumbrian Water had noted insufficient foul drainage capacity as existing and that a condition was suggested to enable them to agree a suitable foul water drainage strategy following further assessment works.

The Senior Planning Officer, SF explained that there would be a requirement in terms of a s106 agreement to secure funding relating to: education shortfall; potential biodiversity mitigation; potential open space shortfall; provision within reserved matters for 15% affordable housing; and any off-site highways upgrades that are directly required as a result of the development.

The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted 13 letters of objection had been received, along with objections from Healeyfield Parish Council.  It was noted that objections raised included: highways safety as a result of increased traffic; that affordable housing may not be affordable to local people; shortage of school places; lack of facilities in the village; use of the steep road used as a rat-run; loss of green open space; and potential drainage issues.

The Senior Planning Officer, SF concluded by noting that it was felt on balance that the proposals were acceptable and the application was recommended for approval subject to conditions and a s106 Legal Agreement as set out within the report.

The Chairman noted that Ms Jennifer Nye, Agent for the Applicant was in attendance and available to answer questions from Members as required.  He asked Members of the Committee for their questions and comments.

Councillor A Shield noted while he had not been on the site visit with the Committee he knew the area very well.  He noted the concerns in terms of the use of the steep road alongside as a ran-run.  He noted he had spoken to other Members in the area and the proposal felt more like “in-fill development” and that his concerns related to the highways impact.  He noted that if there could be assurances in terms of improved viability splay and these concerns from the Highway Officer he would be happy to propose the Officer’s recommendation as set out in the report.

The Principal Highway Development Management (DM) Engineer, David Smith explained that the proposed access was designed to modern standards and a traffic survey on Drover Road had shown an average speed of 28mph.  He added that this in turn yielded a requirement of 43 metres in terms of visibility, with the application demonstrating a visibility of 67 metres in both directions from the proposed access.  The Principal Highway DM Engineer noted the 10% gradient as mentioned by the Councillor, adding there was a 30mph zone before this slope slowing vehicles down.  He explained that in checking statistics there were no accidents recorded for this area and a daily count in reference to the rat-run showed a low number of vehicles and accordingly this was not felt to be a problem and the Highway Section had no objections to the application, subject to conditions as set out within the report.

Councillor D Boyes noted he was happy to support the application, however, he asked why the Parish Council felt the affordable housing would not be affordable to local residents.  The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted there was not full details in relation to affordable housing, however national minimum standards would need to be met.  Councillor D Boyes asked why the Parish Council would think they would not be affordable.  The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted he could not answer this on behalf of the Parish Council.

Councillor A Hopgood noted other developments at Castleside that were “executive housing” and while supportive of the proposal asked if the mix of property types was known, for example to included bungalows.  Ms Jennifer Nye noted that at this outline application stage it was not known.  The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted that Members would have the opportunity to consider any proposals in relation to house type at the Reserved Matters stage.

Councillor O Milburn noted that almost all of the application site was surrounded by an attractive dry-stone wall and asked if there would be any way that it could be insisted that this would be retained as she felt it fitted in perfectly with the rural quality of the area and the ancient woodland.  The Senior Planning Officer, SF noted that he had spoken to the Planning Consultant and that this could be added into conditions.

Councillor A Shield moved that the application be approved as per conditions and s106 Agreement as set out in the report, subject to the condition mentioned by the Senior Planning Officer, SF relating to the dry-stone wall.  Councillor D Boyes seconded the motion.

Upon a vote being take it was

Resolved:

That the application be approved subject to the conditions and a s106 Legal Agreement as set out within the report, and a condition relating to the retention of the dry-stone wall.

Councillor A Shield left the meeting at 3.05pm