Provision of 14 affordable homes and associated ancillary uses.

The application was approved in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, subject to amended conditions.

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, as appended to these Minutes.  He added that two further letters of objection had been received but these raised no new points.  He highlighted the intention to recommend a modification to either condition 4 set out in the printed recommendation or the Section 106 agreement to ensure that maintenance liability for the proposed balancing pond was properly addressed.  He also added that it was proposed that there should be a condition requiring that the dwellings had tiled roofs.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs B Mark, Chairman of Orleton Parish Council, spoke on the application.  Mr C Mitchell, a resident, spoke in objection and Mr P Sutton the applicant’s agent spoke in support.

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

He commented on a number of issues including:

·         There was a demand for affordable housing in the local community. The Scheme complied with Unitary Development Plan policies, was on the edge of the village boundary, and would help to ensure that Orleton remained a living village.

·         The project had been community led with close working with the developer to improve the design of the scheme and other aspects.

·         The site had emerged as the only viable one after a prolonged exercise and investigation of 26 sites.

·         The site had community facilities within reach.  There was a concern about the absence of a footpath but Orleton was a rural village. It was hoped that a village gateway could be developed that would slow traffic.

·         Landscaping would be satisfactory.

·         He considered that the proposed measures would reduce flooding problems. Severn Trent had said that the existing sewerage system, over the capacity of which some concerns had been expressed, could accommodate an additional 20 dwellings.  It was essential, however, that Severn Trent met its legal duty to ensure that the system did cope.

The debate opened and the following principal points were made:

·         It was suggested that the Section 106 agreement should be used to ensure that maintenance liability for the proposed balancing pond was properly resolved.

·         In response to a question about traffic calming the Planning Officer stated that the Transport Manager considered there to be low usage of the road.  Traffic calming measures would have to be led by the Parish Council and the community.

·         Regret was expressed that more had not been done to ensure the sustainability of the development by designing the properties to minimise energy usage and costs.

·         The engagement with the community and the level of consultation was welcomed.

·         The site had a negative impact on the landscape that could not be mitigated and at 120 metres from the village was not close enough.

·         Concern was expressed that Severn Trent would not ensure that the sewerage system would cope and make improvements.

·         It was requested that tree planting needed to be carefully managed to ensure that the impact of the development was mitigated but the development was not hidden and overshadowed.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated his support for the Scheme.  He added that Severn Trent were now attending Parish Council meetings when invited and seemed committed to making improvements.  He believed that the Scheme would be energy efficient.  A village development Group was involved in the tree planting details.

That subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

INFORMATIVES: