Site for 8 dwellings (all matters reserved).

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Site for 8 dwellings (all matters reserved.))

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these Minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr W Jackson, Chairman of Humber, Ford and Stoke Prior Group Parish Council, spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr C Saxon, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mrs H Howie, the applicant’s agent spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor JW Millar spoke on the application.

He commented on a number of issues including:

The site was not one that the village would have chosen for development.

The main concern for both him and the Parish Council was the management of drainage and the flood risk.  Ten out of fifteen of the letters making representations about the development related to flooding.

Surface water run-off ran downhill from the site’s location meeting the stream known as the Prill flooding the centre of the village and making the road impassable.  Ten properties in that location relied on a biodisc system and this was damaged by the flooding.  This had occurred three times in the past year.   The application stated there was the potential to retain water on the site but this did not address surface water run-off.  There needed to be clarity as to whether the proposals would help alleviate flooding or would exacerbate it.

He acknowledged, having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework, that there were a number of grounds for granting outline planning permission.   If that decision were made conditions must require a full drainage survey to be undertaken to demonstrate that the system the applicant proposed to provide was indeed robust.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application the following principal points were made:

The potential for flooding was clear.  It was important that assurance was provided that the proposed measures to manage flooding were appropriate. Conditions 13 and 14 should be given particular attention.

It was observed that trees and hedgerows could contribute greatly to alleviating flooding.

As there was no longer a bus service it was asked if monies which might have been allocated for a bus shelter could instead be allocated to measures to relieve flooding.

The reduction in the number of properties proposed on the site from 14 to 8, 3 of which were to be affordable housing, was welcomed. The provision of these homes including some affordable housing could provide some betterment for the village.

Weight should be given to the view of the Parish Council.

The development was opportunistic.  It also offered nothing, by way of good quality building, for example, to encourage support for the application.  If the development proceeded the developer should be requested to take note of the comments of the Conservation Manager on design of the dwellings to ensure that they were sympathetic to the character of the local area.

It was asked whether S106 monies could be allocated to improve the access.

There were no objections from the statutory consultees.

The Development Manager confirmed that the reserved matters would be brought back to the Committee and would provide an opportunity to consider the quality of design.  He added that there would be a full surface water drainage system.  He also confirmed that the draft Core Strategy had a target of 15% growth for Stoke Prior by 2031.  A development of 8 houses was within that growth target.  He added that the density of development was low.  If fewer houses were provided this would mean that affordable housing would not form part of the scheme.  Access would also be provided to the required standard.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated that the provision of 8 houses in a single development needed to be considered in the context of the core strategy’s target of 15% growth (11 houses) over the life of the Plan.  With regard to water management he requested that conditions ensure that the proposals were robustly assessed and robustly managed.  It was important that the engineer’s report demonstrated the proposals were achievable.  He also asked to be consulted on the proposals if the scheme were approved.

RESOLVED:  That subject to the completion of a Section 106 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 obligation agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms stated in the report, officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers are authorised, after consultation with the Chairman and local ward member, to grant outline planning permission, subject to the conditions below and any other further conditions considered necessary.

1.                     A02   Time limit for submission of reserved matters (outline permission)

2.                     A03   Time limit for commencement (outline permission)

3.                     AO4  Approval of reserved matters

4.                     GO3  Retention of existing trees/hedgerows

5.                     G04   Protection of trees/hedgerows to be retained

6.                     G09   Details of boundary treatments

7.                     G10   Landscaping scheme

8.                     H03   Visibility splays

9.                     H08   Access closure

10.                   H11   Parking- estate development (more than one house)

11.                   H21   Wheel washing

12.                   H29   Secure and covered cycle parking provision

13.                   I20    Scheme of surface water drainage

14.                   I21    Scheme of surface water regulation

15.                   I16    Restriction of hours during construction

16.                   I51   Details of slab levels

Informative:

1.                     The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning policy and any other material considerations. It has subsequently determined to grant planning permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.