Agenda item

Reserved matters application for 250 dwellings with associated highways infrastructure, landscaping, public open space and sustainable urban drainage features pursuant to planning permission DM/16/03958/OUT

The Principal Planning Officer, Henry Jones, gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned reserved matters planning application for 250 dwellings with associated highways infrastructure, landscaping, public open space and sustainable drainage features pursuant to planning permission DM/16/03958/OUT. A copy of which had been circulated (for copy see file of Minutes).

Members noted the report which was supplemented by a presentation including photographs of the proposed layout, access and location of the site.

He advised that the application was to consider reserved matters only and with such, no public comments had been received in respect of the application however local Member, Councillor Higgins had expressed his concerns as detailed in paragraph 50 of the report. It was also noted that the local parish council had not submitted any objections to the application.

The Chair at this point welcomed Councillor Higgins to address the committee.

Councillor Higgins thanked the committee for allowing him the opportunity to put forward his concerns which were as follows. Historically the village has a history of flooding and with 4 ponds and beck already in the area, the addition of a non-fenced off SuDs would be a further area causing safety concerns should children be drawn to play around the pond following heavy rainfall. In addition, the proposed SuDs was close to a walkway and Wellfield School and water attracts children.

Moving on to paragraph 41 of the report, he added that whilst Highways had not submitted any objections he explained that the photographs shown to committee were not up to date and did not reflect the highway issues in the area including the A19 slip road at Wellfield Road B181 junction and the speeds at which cars travelled up and down this stretch of road.

In addition, he noted his dissatisfaction with the number of parking bays to be provided.

Cllr Higgins questioned why a number of planning conditions ordinarily applied to permissions were absent and again questioned absence of S106 contributions. Concerns were also expressed that an objection from the Parish Council had not been referred to.  In conclusion he commented that whilst he understood that outline permission had been granted no consideration had been given to the impact upon already oversubscribed schools and GP surgeries. He therefore urged the committee to refuse the application.

In response the Principal Planning Officer advised that some of the points raised by Councillor Higgins were conditioned at outline permission stage and therefore were not included in conditions of this permission as the application must be read as a whole. He did however for members information, advise that a suite of 106 monies had been secured against the outline planning permission to include recreation, primary school education, cycling and public right of way improvements. Furthermore, he advised that CCGs were consulted with regarding GP surgery capacity and nocomments were received at the outline stage.  However, regardless matters of principle cannot now be revisted at the reserved matters stage. . The Principal Planning Officer also confirmed that no objections were received on the planning file according to his records.

In relation to the comments made regarding highways and traffic, John McGargill, Highways Development Manager advised that a signalised junction at the junction referred to by Councillor Higgins had already been agreed and would be delivered in the near future. In addition, the 20mph estate layout was deemed acceptable in highway terms and resident and visitor parking standards had been met.

Brian Weatherall, Senior Area Drainage Engineer in responding to comments made regarding the SuDS advised that it was not a pond but a basin and would only fill to its maximum levels in very rare storm events. He further made reference to volumes of surface water/run off and how the basin is essential to protect the development from flooding and to avoid raising flood risk elsewhere.  He also stated that national guidance on SuDS design recommends designing safe and accessible features, safety should be ensured with good design practices rather than creating hazards that require fencing or screening.  

The Chair welcomed Frances Nicholson, Applicant to address the committee.

Frances Nicholson commented that Bellway Homes had positively and proactively taken on board feedback from planners and discussions at outline planning stage. In addition, the Councils’ Design Review Panel had scored the site predominantly Green. She therefore considered there to be no reasons for refusal at this stage.

Councillor Clare whilst congratulating Councillor Higgins on putting forward his concerns on behalf of his constituents, noted that unfortunately they were relevant at outline planning stage and therefore no weight could be placed upon them at this time. He did however note that there was an issue regarding perception of GP surgeries being full, generally as a result of inability to obtain appointments. Similarly, speeding and traffic which often was perceived to be an issue was quite different to the facts of the matter. In addressing the concerns regarding safety of children playing by the SuDS, he commented that he found it unlikely that should the weather be so terrible to cause the SuDs to fill it would be highly unlikely that children would be out playing.

Councillor Wilkes commented that he felt that an update was needed to national guidance to address the issues whereby issues school as school places or GP surgeries were not deemed to be an issue or relevant at the time of outline planning permission, but could have become an issue by the time a reserved matters application was considered, which in some cases could 4/5 years later.  He further commented that he did feel a fence surrounding the SuDs would be beneficial and disagreed with Councillor Clare’s comments.

Councillor Richardson asked whether the garages provided would be large enough to fit a car. In response Frances Nicholson advised that each property type regardless of the size of the home had a garage built to new guideline dimensions of 6x3 metres.

Councillor Bell commented that he fully supported the application noting that Bellway were a good and trusted developer. He did however agree that the SuDS was an accident waiting to happen and a fence could be provided at a relatively low cost.

Councillor Shuttleworth proposed that the application be approved subject to the conditions contained within the report. Councillor Atkinson seconded the proposal.

Upon a vote being taken it was

Resolved

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions as contained within the report.