Agenda item

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER

30 dwellings together with associated access, parking, amenity and open space. (Site layout amended by amended plans received 29/01/17, 23/03/17 and 22/08/17).  (Please note plans received on 23/03/17 are only a minor site layout alteration).

RESOLVED:

 

That application 19/01758/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the amended condition 24 as follows:

 

“Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, full details of a scheme for the safety of all road users”.

Audio Recording – Session 2 – 38 Seconds

 

30 dwellings together with associated access, parking, amenity and open space.  (Site layout amended by amended plans received 29/01/17, 23/03/17 and 22/08/17).  (Please note plans received on 23/03/17 are only a minor site layout alteration).

 

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the report in respect of the Application 16/01797/1 and  provided the Committee with the following updates to the report:

 

·                A note had been received from Ashwell Parish Council.  A response to this was provided on 18 September 2019 and this had been circulated to all Members of this Committee prior to the commencement of the meeting.

·                Concerns regarding drainage had been received from Mr and Mrs Hodson. The Lead Local Flood Authority team had confirmed that the design of the drainage system was the subject of a condition.

·                A letter from Mr and Mrs Hare had been received on 13 August 2019 objecting to the application on the basis of traffic and safety concerns regarding both the proposed vehicle and pedestrian access. They raised concerns regarding incorrect terminology within the submitted documents and concluded that the proposed development was unstainable and contrary to the NPPF.

·                An amendment was required to Paragraph 4.3.38.  Condition 25 requires that the safety measures to Ashwell Street be done before any other development commenced on site.

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report in respect of application 16/01797/1 supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

Mr Norton Mahy, Parish Councillor, Ashwell Parish Council, thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee in objection to application 16/01797/1  as follows:

 

·                Safety of pedestrian access;

·                The resurfacing of and installing of street light on Ashwell Street to address safety issues;

·                There was no footpath between the site and the public highway;

·                Heritage impact;

·                Contrary to saved policy SP8; and

·                Details of the planning application history for the site were not mentioned within the report.

 

Councillor Tom Tyson, Member Advocate, thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee in objection of application 16/01797/1 as follows:

 

·                Ashwell Street was too narrow;

·                Larger vehicles such as vans and trucks were not able to drive down the street;

·                The additional houses would increase the volume of pedestrians using the street. However, the road was not suitable for pedestrians;

·                Condition 24 and 25 were not robust enough to mitigate safety of pedestrians;

·                The site failed to meet the requirements of the NPPF which ensured suitable access to the site could be achieved by all users. The site was not suitable for people with mobility issues;

·                Future occupiers would be forced to use vehicles to access the facilities in the village if they felt the walk into the village was too strenuous or hazardous and this undermined the objective of sustainability.

 

The following Members asked questions to Councillor Tyson:

 

·                Councillor Michael Weeks;

·                Councillor Ian Mantle.

 

Councillor Tyson responded to questions as follows:

 

·                Pedestrians were not able to duck into driveways when vehicles came as there were no driveways; and

·                The bus service was non-existent.

 

Mr Richard Kelly, Croudace Homes,  thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee in support of application 16/01797/1 as follows:

 

·                30 houses were proposed, 12 of which were  affordable homes – 8 for rent and 4 shared ownership;

·                This was an allocated site in the emerging local plan;

·                The application had complied with policy AS1;

·                There were no objections from statutory consultees

·                Sympathetic design and impact to existing area;

·                Legal and safe pedestrian access had been provided;

·                There was a need for housing; and

·                The S106 agreement included affordable housing and a contribution to the replacement of the Ashwell Pavilion.

 

The following Members asked questions of Mr Kelly:

 

·                Councillor Michael Weeks;

·                Councillor Terry Tyler;

·                Councillor Daniel Allen; and

·                Councillor Michael Muir.

 

Mr Kelly provided the following responses to questions:

 

·                There was a 30 metre stretch of lane;

·                Pedestrians would be able to see vehicles and wait accordingly;

·                Vehicles would be driving at a low speed;

·                The road would be resurfaced and vegetation cut back to help widen the road;

·                It would not be recommended that pedestrians walked alongside the road as it was narrow.  However, measures would be put in place to ensure pedestrians could see oncoming vehicles; and

·                The steps into the village were already providing a service to the village.

 

In response to a question, the Senior Planning Officer advised that the affordable homes would be restricted to people with a local connection to Ashwell in the first instance.

 

As Councillor Tom Tyson had spoken as Member Advocate on this item, he left the Chamber and took no part in the debate or vote.

 

The following Members took part in the debate:

 

·                Councillor Ian Mantle;

·                Councillor Sean Prendergast;

·                Councillor Michael Weeks;

·                Councillor Daniel Allen;

·                Councillor Tony Hunter; and

·                Councillor Terry Tyler.

 

The following points  were raised by Members:

 

·                There was a concern with the sustainability of this site as it did not encourage other forms of transport other than cars;

·                Villages had to play their part in building new homes;

·                The development design was sympathetic to the village;

·                Pedestrian access was a concern;

·                Pedestrians needed to include those who were cycling, in a wheelchair, mobility scooters or pushing a pushchair.

 

In response to the points discussed by Members, the Senior Planning Officer advised that:

 

·                The development was Category A, meaning that there were facilities within the village that made it a sustainable development;

·                Conditions 24 and 25 needed to be met before any work commenced;

·                The road was a shared space thus both pedestrians and drivers needed to be aware of each other; and

·                The application would enhance the safety measures of the road by improving visibility to make it as safe as possible.

 

Members recommended that Condition 24 be amended to take into account all users of the road.

 

It was proposed by Councillor Michael Muir and seconded by Councillor Ian Mantle that the application be granted subject to the amendment of condition 24.

 

Upon being put to the vote it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

That application 19/01758/FP be GRANTED planning permission subject to the conditions and reasons contained in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager and the amended condition 24 as follows:

 

“Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, full details of a scheme for the safety of all road users”.