Erection of 10 no. affordable homes with associated parking, access & landscaping.

The application could not be determined as the applicant had lodged an appeal on the basis of non-determination.

The Committee would have been minded to approve the application in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation if the appeal had not been lodged.

The Senior 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.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Clark, representing Linton Parish Council; and Mr Price, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor H Bramer, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

·         A technical report regarding the drainage issues at the site had been sent to the Planning Committee Members.

·         Members were thanked for attending the site visit.

·         There were significant issues regarding highway safety at Ivy House Lane.

·         Child safety was an important factor in determining the application.

The Development Manager advised the Committee that an appeal against non-determination had been received on Monday 21 April 2013 and as a result of this the application could not be determined by the Planning Committee. However in order to make an appropriate representation in respect of the appeal it was necessary for the Committee  to advise officers as to how they would have determined the application had they been in a position to do so.

The first member of the Committee to speak on the application was of the opinion that it should be refused contrary to the case officer’s recommendation. He noted the concerns of the parish council and of the local residents and had concerns regarding child safety due to the busy B road, which connected to a motorway. He also noted the concerns raised in respect of drainage and considered that as a result of these issues the development was not sustainable. He moved that the application be refused in accordance with Unitary Development Plan Policies S1, DR2, DR3 and T8.

The Committee stated that they were not in agreement with this view and a motion to approve the application was moved and seconded. Members noted that the drainage issues had been addressed through appropriate conditions and that the development could not commence until these issues had been fully resolved. Members did have some concern in respect of the vehicular speed in the vicinity of the school and requested that a condition be added to the resolution requiring the speed limit to be reduced to 20mph. Members continued to discuss the application and noted that the development could reduce vehicular movements to the school as residents of the proposed dwellings would be able to walk to the nearby primary school.

It was noted that a site search had been underway since 2007 and that this was the most appropriate site identified in Gorsley. The debate continued with Members supporting the application. It was considered that the application would result in the area being more built up which could also lead to a reduction in vehicle speeds.

During the debate the Parish Council were strongly advised to commence work on a neighbourhood plan,

In response to a number of issues raised by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 181

Erection of 10 no. affordable homes with associated parking, access & landscaping.

The determination of the application was deferred pending a site inspection.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Foley, Chairman of Linton Parish Council, and Mr Price, a neighbouring resident, both spoke in objection to the application.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor H Bramer, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

·         The potential of ten affordable homes in a rural location would usually be welcomed however due to the site location the proposal could not be supported.

·         The proposed site was adjacent to the village school.

·         There were significant traffic problems in the vicinity of the school at the start and end of the school day.

·         The local publican allowed parking on his land during peak times but this did not address the problem fully.

·         Local residents and school staff were concerned for the safety of pupils.

·         The application should be refused.

The Committee had concerns in respect of the traffic issues around the school and requested that further discussions be undertaken with the applicant in an attempt to secure some appropriate parking provision at the school. The issue of parking around the school was raised by a number of members and ultimately they decided that it would be beneficial for them to visit the site during peak time in order for them to form an opinion in respect of the traffic issues.

It was noted that there were some issues regarding drainage raised by the public speaker. The Committee requested that the matter be addressed prior to the application being determined at the next meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the determination of the application be deferred for a site visit on the following grounds:

1.         The character and appearance of the development itself is a fundamental planning consideration.

2.         A judgement is required on visual impact.

3.         The setting and surroundings are fundamental to the determination or to the conditions being considered, and cannot reasonably be made without visiting the site.