Application for approval of reserved matters following outline approval. (160581 - Proposed site for the erection of 5 no. four bedroom dwellings).

Application approved, in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

The Principal Planning Officer provided a presentation on the application and the updates/representations received following the publication of the agenda.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mr. Edwards spoke on behalf of Titley Group Parish Council, Mr. Jones, local resident spoke in objection to the application and Mr Tompkins, the applicant's agent spoke in support.

In accordance with the council's constitution the local ward member spoke on the application. In summary, he explained that although the principle for development had been established on the application site, from an earlier permission, the committee had expressed concerns regarding the design and the height of the proposed houses. Following the deferral of the application at a previous meeting of the planning committee the applicant had made some changes to the design of the houses but there had been no change to the size, height or footprint of the properties proposed on the site. These issues had been of concern to the committee at the previous meeting and had led to the deferral of the application. The settlement of Titley was a village but could be classed as a hamlet and had experienced minimal development since the Second World War. The application represented development that was an exception to the gradual construction of dwellings and a substantial increase in housing locally. Since the meeting of the committee, at which the application had been deferred, the Titley Group Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP) had been made and the committee now had a number of relevant planning policies on which to refuse the application. Core strategy policies LD1, LD4 were cited as grounds for the refusal of the application together with NDP policies TG1, TG2, TG13, TG15 and TG 16. The committee had provided the applicant with the opportunity to amend the application to ensure that it respected the landscape and to modify the design of the houses in line with the reasons for deferral from the previous committee meeting. The changes undertaken to the application were seen as a missed opportunity as the houses continued to be excessively large and dominant for the site on which they were positioned.

The committee debated the application.

There was concern on the part of some members that the reasons for the deferral of the application at the previous committee meeting had not been taken into account in the modifications that had been made to the design of the houses.

Councillor Jacqui Carwardine left the meeting at 10:40 a.m.

Councillor Polly Andrews proposed and Councillor Richard Thomas seconded a motion that the application be deferred to offer the applicant an opportunity to modify the scale and height of the houses in the application. Councillor Richard Thomas subsequently withdrew as the seconder to the motion; the motion was therefore not formally moved.

There was division among the members of the committee. It was the contention of some members that the scale and size of the buildings remained excessive. Other members of the committee cited examples in the locality of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33