Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

 

Application for approval of reserved matters comprising of access, landscaping, layout, scale and appearance of Phase 1 the development (pursuant to Outline application 14/02485/1 granted 07/12/2016) as amended by plans received on 22 December 2017; 30 January 2018; 27 March 2018; 18 April 2018; and 02 May 2018.

RESOLVED: That application 17/02627/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to the conditions and reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and subject to the amended Condition 11 and additional condition 12 below.

 

Condition 11

 

Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, an amended site plan and elevation details showing provision of external residential storage for dwellings suitable for at least 3 bins and a caddy, that is accessible, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

The details approved by way of this condition must be implemented prior to the

occupation of any dwelling hereby approved.

 

Reason: To ensure adequate outdoor storage as required in association with

the residential use of the site.

 

Condition 12

 

Prior to commencement of that part of the development further details regarding the enclosure and equipment and long-term management and maintenance of the local areas of play will be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Application for approval of reserved matters comprising of access, landscaping, layout, scale and appearance of Phase 1 the development (pursuant to Outline application 14/02485/1 granted 07/12/2016) as amended by plans received on 22 December 2017; 30 January 2018; 27 March 2018; 18 April 2018; and 02 May 2018.

 

The Planning Officer advised that an additional condition was required as follows:

 

“Prior to commencement of that part of the development further details regarding the enclosure and equipment and long-term management and maintenance of the local areas of play will be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

The local areas of play should be subsequently implemented, managed and maintained in accordance with the details of this condition”.

 

The Planning Officer updated the Committee as follows:

 

The response received from the Highways Authority had not been recorded in section 3 of the report. A response had been received from the Highways Authority with no objection, subject to the conditions, Paragraph 4.3.20 discussed those conditions.

 

Outline permission had already been approved subject to conditions and a Section 106 agreement and this application was to consider reserved matters of access, appearance, landscape, layout and scale.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report of the Development and Conservation Manager in respect of planning application 17/02627/1.supported by a visual presentation consisting of plans, drawings and photographs of the site.

 

Mr Mike Cummins thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee in objection to application 17/02627/1

 

Mr Cummins advised that he was speaking on behalf of the residents of the Garden Walk area of Royston.

 

He and his wife had followed the application from the original application through to today.

 

Whilst they became resigned to the loss of the green and pleasant land in question, it was clear that Royston needed housing, particularly affordable housing and residents wanted positive expansion that would not be detrimental to the Town or the area in general. However, the rate of expansion of Royston, through this and other developments, was alarming and the number of new proposals was becoming a concern.

 

In these austere times the income for the town from new housing would be welcome but the infrastructure in the Town needed to be advanced to cope with that expansion. Anyone living in the town would know how difficult it was to get an appointment with a doctor or dentist, to dispose of items at the recycling depot when it was full or even to simply drive through the town at peak times.

 

The state of the roads would only become worse if more people use them and maintenance was neglected through insufficient funding.

 

The Town must grow and improve to accommodate the increasing population.

 

In Garden Walk traffic was an issue with two schools, a football club, a Brownie hut and existing additional development. The prospect of further additional traffic resulting from the opening of the end of Garden Walk onto the new development was causing concern.

 

The two reasons given for access to the development via Garden Walk was emergency vehicles and the bus service.

 

The possibility of a bus service arose during the outline planning stage and was included as Condition 11. However, they had been unable to ascertain who initiated this idea. A bus service had not been provided to other developments so why was it considered that this development needed one. The bus company stated, when contacted that they could not provide any additional services and had not been contacted about extending services

 

Emergency access could be controlled by lockable gates and Condition 11 could allow for a bus service to be introduced in the future anything but a physical barrier would be unlikely to succeed in stopping all unauthorised traffic and would have ongoing running and maintenance costs.

 

M Cummins concluded by stating that the safety of all users of Garden Walk must be the ultimate priority and the mixture of more children and more traffic would offer too much opportunity for accidents, injury or worse.

 

The Chairman thanked Mr Cummins for his presentation

 

Mr John Baines, Applicant, thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee in support of application 17/02627/1.

 

Mr Baines advised that was supportive of the Officer’s recommendations and that the principal of development had been established in December 2016 and in January 2018 access onto the A505, via a new roundabout, was approved, which enabled detailed discussions to commence with Highways in relation to the Section 278 agreement.

 

The first phase of development comprised of 83 new homes, of which 35 percent would be affordable homes for North Herts Homes.

 

They had worked hard on the design to ensure that development standards were either met or exceeded with the design being revised numerous times, most recently to address the concerns of the Highways Authority by increasing the width of the principal roads on the site to ensure their suitability for a bus route.

 

They had purchased the site with outline planning consent, which included a condition that included the provision of bus and emergency vehicle access through Garden Walk.

 

They were aware of the concerns of residents about this access point through conversations with residents, the Town Council and Royston Members and would do whatever was asked to ensure that appropriate access control was in place, however the decision ultimately lay with the Highways Authority.

 

They would provide retractable bollards in Garden Walk and ANPR, however the developers would be happy to provide a gate until such time as the bus route became operational.

 

As part of the Section 278 discussions with Highways, they were preparing the technical details of the construction of the access from the A505 and all construction vehicles would be required to use this access and would be provided with a suitably sized car park. All of this detail was controlled by conditions in the outline planning permission.

 

The scheme was a high-quality development, appropriate to the area with attractive new homes and landscaped open spaces to ensure this development would be an enjoyable place to live.

 

Mr Baines thanked the Officers for their diligence and commended the scheme for approval.

 

Members asked whether any dwellings would be fitted with solar panels and queried if the bus route was feasible if cars were parked along the route.

 

Mr Baines advised that there was no intention to fit solar panels and, in respect of the bus route, this was a requirement of the outline planning permission, although he did not know where the request came from.

 

Members asked whether the bus company had been consulted regarding the route and had it other methods of restricting access been considered.

 

Mr Baines advised that he had not spoken to the bus operator, however there was a requirement for the development to provide £350,000 for bus services.

 

He had submitted a plan to discharge the condition, which proposed bollards and an ANPR camera. They would be happy to provide emergency vehicle gates until such time as the bus services were extended into the site.

 

Members queried why only 35 percent affordable housing had been planned.

 

Mr Baines advised that the Section 106 agreement granted in 2016 required only 30 percent, but they were providing 35 percent in this first phase.

 

The Chairman thanked Mr Baines for his presentation.

 

The Planning Officer advised that the bus service was provided through Section 106 contributions and that Highways, rather than the bus company, would confirm the route that was required to make the development sustainable as some of the properties within the site were more than 800 metres away from the next bus stop, which was considered unacceptable on sustainability grounds.

 

Members questioned whether Highways had expressed any opinion on the proposal that the bus route go through Garden Walk and commented that the number 16 bus route was a contract service and therefore the County Public Transport Service should be contacted.

 

The Planning Officer advised that there had been no indication from the Highways Authority yet as they were waiting for the detailed transport plan. However, the only other useable access was via the A505, which would be a very convoluted route and the number 16 bus service already serviced Garden Walk.

 

Members noted that bin storage details were crucial and if this was not correct in the design stage then major problems would occur and it was suggested that Condition 11 be strengthened to read:

 

“Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, an amended site plan and elevation details showing provision of external residential storage for dwellings suitable for at least 3 bins and a caddy that is accessible must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

The details approved by way of this condition must be implemented prior to the

occupation of any dwelling hereby approved.”

 

Members noted the ecology report that commented on birds and bats, they advised that there was a badger sett close to the proposed entrance to the site and queried how this would be protected.

 

The Planning Officer advised that HCC Ecology had reviewed the report and had no objection, subject to conditions and that badgers had been included in the Construction Method Statement.

 

Upon being moved, seconded, and put to the vote, it was

           

RESOLVED: That application 17/02627/1 be GRANTED planning permission, subject to the conditions and reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and subject to the amended Condition 11 and additional condition 12 below.

 

Condition 11

 

Notwithstanding the plans hereby approved, an amended site plan and elevation details showing provision of external residential storage for dwellings suitable for at least 3 bins and a caddy, that is accessible, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

The details approved by way of this condition must be implemented prior to the

occupation of any dwelling hereby approved.

 

Reason: To ensure adequate outdoor storage as required in association with

the residential use of the site.

 

Condition 12

 

Prior to commencement of that part of the development further details regarding the enclosure and equipment and long-term management and maintenance of the local areas of play will be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.