Agenda item

Residential Development for the erection of 59 no. dwellings (C3) with associated infrastructure, landscaping and drainage.

The Senior Planning Officer, Leigh Dalby, 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 application was residential development for the erection of 59 no. dwellings (C3) with associated infrastructure, landscaping and drainage, and was recommended for approval, subject to conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Chair thanked the Senior Planning Officer and asked Mr Alistair Willis, Agent for the applicant to speak in support of the application.

Mr A Willis thanked the Chair and Committee and noted he had nothing to add to the Officer’s presentation and thanked Officers for their work in relation to the application.

The Chair thanked Mr A Willis and asked the Committee for their comments and questions.

Councillor C Marshall noted he felt it was a fairly straightforward application adding he welcomed the Section 106 contributions as outlined.  He noted that the development would add to the housing mix in the area and moved that the application be approved as per the recommendation.

Councillor J Elmer asked several questions relating to: ‘net gain’ in respect of ecology, noting he felt a few bat and bird boxes was not sufficient to compensate for loss of natural nesting sites; eight of the units failing to meet national space standards and asked for evidence in relation to viability; and a lack of detail in terms of meeting County Durham Plan (CDP) Policy 29 in relation to carbon reduction measures.  The Senior Planning Officer noted that the recommendations in respect of bat and bird boxes had been requested by the Council’s Ecologist and Planners would be led by the Ecologist’s expertise in that regard.  He added that proposed Condition 15 would require details of a scheme to minimise greenhouse gas emissions, with the aim of achieving as close as possible a zero carbon building and that it should be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  He noted that could include elements such as electric vehicle (EV) charging points.

The Principal Planning Officer, Paul Hopper noted, in respect of national space standards and viability of the development, the applicant had submitted a viability assessment with the application and Officers had challenged the applicant on the issue.  He noted the Agent for the applicant was in attendance and may be able to offer additional information in that regard.  The Chair asked if Mr A Willis would respond.  Mr A Willis explained that the site had viability constraints, being brownfield and with limited grant available.  He added that in submitting the viability assessment, it had taken into account the financial contributions to be made through the Section 106 Agreement and explained that any reduction in the number of units would render the scheme undeliverable by the Registered Provider.

Councillor L Brown noted the application was laudable, with affordable properties, bungalows and EV charging points, however, she noted that elements such as gas boilers would soon be obsolete and there was no reference to solar panels.  She reminded Members that the Council had declared a climate emergency and CDP Policy 29 sought to minimise greenhouse gas emissions and promote renewable energy.  She noted she did not feel the application achieved that.

Councillor K Shaw referred to the Housing Strategy and noted he was more inclined to have houses that met the need of the residents and felt the application would bring long-standing benefits to a derelict site and therefore he fully supported the recommendation and seconded the motion for approval.

Councillor J Elmer explained he agreed to the principle of the scheme and noted there should be praise for the types of housing it would provide.  He added that he would wish to optimise the quality of the properties and asked, through the Chair, if the Agent for the applicant could clarify as regards what types of carbon reduction measures the applicant would take in respect of Condition 5.  The Chair asked Mr A Willis if he wished to respond.  Mr A Willis noted that he did not have all the details, however, 10 percent of the CO₂ would be offset via solar panels or air-source heat pumps, and there would also be the inclusion of EV charging points.  Councillor J Elmer noted that his point was that such details could be provided at this stage for Members’ consideration.  The Chair noted that was a similar point to one made at a meeting of the County Planning Committee, adding Officers would make note for future reports.

Councillor C Marshall noted that the point was valid, however, if Members were unhappy with the green credentials of a policy then it was an issue for Members to take up with the Cabinet Members.  He added it was not for the Planning Committee to devise policy, rather to assess an application against the policies in place, and to do otherwise would create uncertainty for developers. 

Councillor J Elmer noted the need to focus on the material concerns of the application and added he was trying to defend the CDP, specifically Policy 29 in respect of space standards and carbon reduction, and that it would be misleading to suggest he was doing otherwise.

Upon a vote being taken it was:

RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and Section 106 Legal Agreement as set out within the report.