Site for residential development of up to 100 dwellings with associated means of access and car parking.

The Committee deferred determination of this application.

(Site for residential development of up to 100 dwellings with associated means of access and car parking.)

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the application.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr K Francis of Ledbury Town Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr I Smethurst, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mr R Yeoman, Chairman of Ledbury Cricket Club, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillors TL Widdows and EPJ Harvey, two of the three local ward members, spoke on the application.

CouncillorWiddows commented on a number of issues including:

·         The proposal on the face of it might seem a good deal when considered alongside the relocation of the cricket pitch.  However, he had a number of concerns.

·         The proposal would involve the loss of public open space contrary to policy RST4. 

·         It would also involve the loss of the only pitch where adult football could currently be played.  That alternative facility only had junior pitches.

·         The Town Council was developing a Neighbourhood Plan and wanted to consult on possible housing sites.  The application was therefore premature.

·         He questioned whether the road system could cope with a development of the scale proposed which was also too close to the roundabout where New Street joined the A417.

·         The site to which the cricket club proposed to relocate was not adequate.  Access by means other than car would involve crossing the bypass which had a 60mph speed limit and walking 500m alongside the bypass to the site.

Councillor Harvey commented on a number of issues including:

·         The Town Council and the Core Strategy had identified the possibility of siting housing north of the railway viaduct, with sports provision forming part of that development.  She suggested the proposal was premature adding that she would like to see exploration of all the options as part of the neighbourhood planning process.

·         The proposed access was of concern.  The junction was close to the roundabout where New Street joined the A417and traffic travelled at speed.  There were 50 vehicles per hour at peak travel times and the Full Pitcher pub was open all day.  She considered that the assessment of traffic movements was optimistic and did not take full account of the school run and shopping trips.  She believed there was the possibility of traffic backing up.  If the Committee was minded to refuse or defer determination of the application she could provide policy grounds for doing so.

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

·         The fact that there were only six letters of objection to a development of 100 houses suggested that there was support for the application.

·         As paragraph 6.13 of the report stated the site was within the constraint of the A417 which formed a development boundary and was a logical addition to the town.

·         It was important to seek to meet the bulk of the County’s housing shortfall by expansion of the city and the market towns.

·         The alternative site for the cricket club was not equivalent to the current provision on the edge of the Town.  Ledbury had a shortage of public open space and policy RST4 was relevant.

·         The cricket club would have better facilities on the alternative site being proposed.

·         New Street was a busy street and its capacity to absorb traffic from 100 dwellings was questioned.

·         The proposal offered the opportunity to address some of the existing concerns about speed and highway safety at the roundabout.

·         The NPPF stated that developers should work with the local community.  Discussions should take place with the Town Council and the Neighbourhood Planning Group about design and layout of the scheme.

·         It was proposed that determination should be deferred to permit discussion of the options to take place as part of the neighbourhood plan process.

The Development Manager commented that the Ledbury Football Club ground was not part of the application.  There was a proposed replacement for the cricket facilities that currently used the application site.  In terms of access to those new facilities he noted that the site was close to Ledbury Rugby Club. 

The Transportation Manager informed the Committee that a new design for access to the Full Pitcher site had recently been drawn up, superseding that referred to in the presentation.  The change to the design would mean that speeds would be lower and the access safe.  Traffic movements were calculated using a national database.  It was considered that a right hand turn lane into the site was not required and that cost saving could fund improvements to the roundabout where New Street joined the A417 which was an accident cluster site. 

The local ward members were given the opportunity to close the debate.

CouncillorWiddows commented on the importance of preserving sporting facilities and open space.  The NPPF provided that existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:  an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location.  This had not been addressed.  He added that the bypass might form a development boundary but this did not mean that all green space within that boundary should be developed.

Councillor Harvey endorsed Councillor Widdows' comments.  She considered that there had been few letters of objection because a number of previous applications had been unsuccessful and the belief was that development of the site would not be permitted.  She reiterated concerns about the adequacy of the replacement sports provision and the insufficiency of green open space within the Town.  She also questioned the changes to the proposed access and whether there had been adequate consultation on this aspect. 

The Development Manager commented that in the light of the new access arrangements he would support deferral of determination of the application.

RESOLVED: That determination of the application be deferred.