Proposed outline consent for the erection of up to 38 dwellings.

The application was refused contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed outline consent for the erection of up to 38 dwellings.)

The Development Manager 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 P Fountain of Lea Parish Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr S Banner, Chairman of the Lea Action Group, spoke in objection.  Mr B Weatherley, 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 H Bramer spoke on the application.

He commented on a number of issues including:

·         The application was a further one predicated on the absence of a five year housing land supply.  In Lea there were 218 properties.  The draft Core strategy envisaged 14% growth up to 2031(30 additional homes).  Permission had already been granted for 48 additional homes in Lea.  This further application was a step too far.

·         Welsh Water had expressed strong concerns regarding overland flooding downstream of the proposal.

·         The Transportation Manager had identified that the visibility splays for access needed to be addressed.

·         The land drainage manager had identified concerns about fluvial flood risk.

·         He highlighted the objections of Lea Parish Council and Ashton Ingham Parish Council set out in the report.

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

·         The proposal represented overdevelopment, with too much development delivered too quickly which would have a significant detrimental effect.  The application should be refused on these grounds.

·         The two Parish Councils had highlighted a number of material considerations in their objections.

The Transportation Manager commented that revised drawings indicated that the visibility splays at the site’s access would be satisfactory.

The Development Manager commented that Welsh Water’s concerns related to a flood alleviation scheme.  Such a scheme would have to be provided before the occupation of any dwellings.  There were strong objections to proposed limits on growth in the core strategy and no limit could therefore be placed on development based on the number of houses for which permission had already been granted.  He emphasised that an application for 40 homes at Lea had been refused under delegated powers because the proposal had been unacceptable. In contrast, officers considered this application site to be suitable for development. S106 monies would address the pressure on provision of school places.  He could not provide the Committee with grounds for refusal.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated his comments about the scale of development at Lea adding that he did not consider the proposed development to be sustainable.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be refused on the grounds set out below and officers named in the scheme of delegation be authorised to finalise the drafting of the reasons for refusal for publication:  the development would represent overdevelopment of Lea.

Informative

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 and by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and clearly setting these out in the reasons for refusal.  Furthermore, Members of the planning committee which took the decision to refuse planning permission have been asked to consider whether there are opportunities to amend the development to address this harm.  Where a potential way forward has been identified, this has been communicated to the Applicant. The Local Planning Authority is willing to provide pre-application advice in respect of any future application for a revised development.