Agenda item
This application is referred to Planning Committee at the request of the Assistant Director of Planning as the original outline application was refused by the Local Planning Authority and the decision was overturned by the Planning Inspectorate.
The current application seeks approval of the reserved matters relating to outline planning permission 17/0881/OUT, which granted planning permission for the erection of up to 136 dwellings with access from Weeley Road, informal recreation space, a local area of play and associated development. This application includes details of appearance, landscaping, access, layout and scale which were not included as part of the outline.
Minutes:
Before the meeting, an update sheet had been distributed to the Committee with details of an update in respect of two new comments received from neighbouring properties; landscaping & biodiversity; archaeology; and recommended additional conditions.
The Committee was informed that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee at the request of the Assistant Director (Planning) as the original outline application had been refused by the Local Planning Authority and its decision had been subsequently overturned by the Planning Inspectorate.
Members were informed that the current application sought approval of the reserved matters relating to outline planning permission 17/0881/OUT, which granted planning permission for the erection of up to 136 dwellings with access from Weeley Road, informal recreation space, a local area of play and associated development. This application also included details of appearance, landscaping, access, layout and scale which had not been included as part of the outline.
The Committee was made aware that the application also dealt with the ‘detail’ of a footpath only link to Birch Avenue being under 3m in width. The original outline permission had required this link to be a pedestrian and cycle link and 3m wide. . This matter had already been deliberated upon by the Committee earlier in the meeting when it had considered application 21/01257/OUT (Minute 186 referred).
As established through the granting of outline application 17/0881/OUT the principle of residential development for up to 136 dwellings on this site was acceptable. [However, the Committee had not considered it to be acceptable under application 21/01257/OUT, that the footpath link to Birch Avenue could be under 3m in width and pedestrian only.]
The detailed design, layout, landscaping and scale were considered acceptable by Officers who felt that the proposal would result in no material harm to residential amenity or highway safety.
The application was therefore recommended by Officers for approval subject to a legal agreement to secure the management of the open space, drainage features, landscaping and non-adopted highway network.
The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.
At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Officer (Nick Westlake) in respect of the application.
Samuel Caslin, acting on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.
Alison Clark, a resident, spoke against the application.
Councillor Lynda McWilliams, the local Ward Member, spoke against the application.
|
Matters raised by a Committee Member:- |
Officer’s response thereto:- |
|
Where in the report does it state it has to be 90mtrs splay on either side of the access? |
The applicant is adhering to the Essex Highways Design Standards for this speed of road. |
|
Where are the affordable houses? Also is it correct that the affordable houses don’t have garages? |
They tend to be situated at the western end of the site; albeit they are clustered in groups of no more than 10 dwellings per cluster and as such meet the requirements of the emerging Local Plan, at least ‘technically’ but perhaps not in the spirit of ensuring that the AH units are pepperpotted across the entire site. Yes none of the affordable houses have garages but in this case neither do many of the private units, so it is reasonable to conclude that the proposed scheme would be ‘tenure blind’. |
|
Will the possible archaeological aspect of this site be investigated? |
There is a recommendation that assures this must take place. |
|
Is there a way to challenge the decision of the Tree Officer? |
They would need a report from an expert offering evidence in the contrary to the Officer that would then be considered. |
|
Are the external chimney stacks actual useable chimneys or just faux chimneys? |
Faux chimneys |
Following discussion by the Committee, it was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Placey and:-
RESOLVED that : consideration of application 21/00977/DETAIL be deferred in order to allow the Officers to attempt to resolve the following matters with the Applicant:-
· The footpath link;
· retention of the oak trees in the field;
· visibility splays to access;
· archaeological exploration;
· clustering of affordable housing to be reconsidered and better ‘pepper potted’ across development; and
· consideration to be given to extending 30mph speed limit to the east along Weeley Road.
Supporting documents:
PDF 698 KB