Agenda item

Report No: DEV/FH/15/047

Residential development of up to 34 dwellings together with associated roads paths and access to the public highway

Outline planning application – residential development of up to 34 dwellings together with associated roads, paths and access to the public highway.

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee due to its potential cumulative impact upon the village of Kentford when considered in conjunction with other planning applications.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  Kentford Parish Council and a number of residents objected to the application.  Officers were recommending that the application be approved as set out in Paragraph 140 of Report No DEV/FH/15/047.

The Principal Planning Officer – Major Projects confirmed that the application before the Committee was in outline form and the mans of access only to the site formed part of the application.  All other matters were reserved for consideration as part of any subsequent reserved matters application(s).

Attention was drawn to an error within Paragraph 63; Members were advised that the “…171 dwellings.” made reference to at the very end of the paragraph should have read 117.

The Committee was also reminded that a Tree Preservation Order in connection with the site was considered and confirmed by Members at their October meeting.

In response to a question raised by Councillor Simon Cole with regard to the S106 Open Space contribution, the Officer explained that the figure would be based on the final number and the amount of open space provided on site; which at this point in time was unknown.

Councillor Carol Lynch spoke against the application and proposed that it be refused on the basis of prematurity and concerns with the infrastructure capacity.   This was duly seconded by Councillor Peter Ridgwell.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) advised the Committee that the motion to refuse would be “minded to” as it was contrary to the Officer recommendation of approval and was considered to have risks associated with the Council’s policies, an appeal and the potential risk that the refusal could be judged by the Inspectorate to have been unreasonable; thereby risking an award of costs against the Council.  This route, in accordance with the decision making protocol, would enable Officers to prepare a risk assessment report for consideration at the next meeting.

Upon being put to the vote and with 2 voting for, 8 against and with 2 abstentions the Chairman declared the motion failed.

Councillor David Bowman then proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation, and this was duly seconded by Councillor Bill Sadler.  With 9 voting for, 1 against and with 2 abstentions it was resolved that:

The application be APPROVED subject to:

1.   The completion of a S106 agreement to secure:

•        Affordable housing – 30% of the total dwelling units.

•        Primary school contribution –£3,224 per dwelling.

•        Pre-school contribution - £18,273.

•        Highways contributions - £13 731(cycle link across Bury Road), public transport infrastructure: £4,000.

•        Open space contribution – in accordance with SPD.

In the event that there are any substantive changes to the S106 package, then this will go back to Members for consideration.

2.   And the following conditions:

1.       Outline time limit.

2.       Reserved Matters to be agreed (appearance, scale, layout [including internal site layout of roads and ways] and landscaping).

3.       Compliance with approved plans.

4.       Highways – details of proposed access.

5.       Highways – details of bin storage.

6.       Highways – details of surface water discharge.

7.       Highways – details of carriageways and footways.

8.       Highways - details of car parking and manoeuvring areas, including cycle storage.

9.       Highways – details of turning space.

10.     Highways – provision of visibility splays.

11.     Archaeology – implementation of a programme of work; site investigation and post investigation assessment.

12.     Contamination – remediation strategy.

13.     Contamination – further investigative work if necessary.

14.     Details of surface water disposal.

15.     No piling or investigation boreholes using penetrative methods.

16.     Scheme to provide flood plain compensation.

17.     Scheme of surface water drainage/surface water strategy.

18.     Scheme for provision and implementation of pollution control.

19.     Foul water disposal details.

20.     Surface water drainage details.

21.     Construction management plan.

22.     Hours of construction.

23.     Design code.

24.     Details of boundary treatment.

25.     Samples of materials.

26.     Detailed scheme of hard and soft landscaping.

27.     Arboricultural Impact Assessment.

28.     Tree survey and management plan for tree belts, including planting details.

29.     Tree protection details, including details of tree works for retained trees.

30.     No development within RPA of existing trees.

31.     No development to take place until the use of the site by bats has been fully investigated and any mitigation agreed.

32.     Landscape management plan, including enhancements for biodiversity.

33.     Details of bat licence.

34.     Details of lighting.

35.     Provision of fire hydrants.

36.     Waste minimisation and recycling strategy.

Speakers:    Mrs Liz Sneezum spoke against the application

Councillor Malcom Baker (Kentford Parish Council) spoke against the application.

Councillor David Bimson left the meeting at 7.26pm during the preliminary discussion of the above item and prior to the voting thereon.