Proposed erection of up to 31 dwellings.  Construction of new vehicular access and associated works.  Demolition of No 5 Vine Tree Close.

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

(Proposed erection of up to 31 dwellings.  Construction of new vehicular access and associated works.  Demolition of no. 5 Vine Tree Close.)

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application.  He noted that an application for 45 dwellings had been refused by the Committee on 29 October 2014 and was currently the subject of an appeal.  The application was a resubmission proposing up to 31 dwellings.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr P Bainbridge, Chairman of Withington Parish Council spoke in opposition to the Scheme.  Mr M Warner, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mr P Smith, the applicant, spoke in support.

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

He commented on a number of issues including:

·         The objections to the original proposal remained valid. The site was at the highest point of the village and highly visible.  The demolition of a house to provide an access was unwelcome.  All the works traffic would have to travel between the two dwellings either side of the proposed access which in addition to having an adverse effect on those two properties would also adversely affect other neighbours.

·         There was concern about flooding from the site affecting homes below the site.

·         There were alternative sites for development.

·         There had been 96 letters of objection and in canvassing opinion on a visit to the area he had found no support for the development.

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

·         The grounds on which the Committee had previously refused the application remained valid.

·         The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment had categorised the site as having significant constraints.

·         The character and ambience of Vine Tree Close would be adversely affected by the development.

The Development Manager commented that at the current appeal the Council was not defending the lack of a proven surface water drainage proposal, one of the Committee’s original grounds for refusal.  He requested that this should be withdrawn as a ground for refusing the resubmitted application.  No weight could be given to the Neighbourhood Plan.  The Housing Development Officer supported the application.  There was a need for affordable housing in the village which the scheme would provide.  Weight should be given to the Council’s lack of a 5 year housing land supply.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated his opposition to the Scheme because of its adverse impact.

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 adverse impact on neighbouring residents of the proposed access, and saved polices of the UDP: LA2 – landscape character and areas least resilient to change, and LA 3 – setting of settlements.

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. The Local Planning Authority is willing to provide pre-application advice in respect of any future application for a revised development.