Approval of reserved matters for the erection of 8 dwellings with associated infrastructure, ancillary facilities and landscaping

Approval of reserved matters for the erection of 8 dwellings with associated infrastructure, ancillary facilities and landscaping

Please refer to the late material circulated before the start of the meeting

Principal Planning Officer, Tony Pope, referred to the late material and to the additional condition stating that no development should take place until details of the additional hedging and removal of fencing had been approved. He said that the proposals represented an integrated design for this and the adjoining site and demonstrated how the two sites interrelated.

Public speaking

Speaking as the agent for the application, the speaker made the following statement: -

As your officer has already provided a comprehensive update, I will not take much of your time, just a reminder that the overall parameters for design, materials, landscaping and so forth were established through the approval of the reserved matters in January this year. My client’s design team has responded to the detailed and constructive criticism received from your officers, and are happy to accept the proposed pre-commencement condition. Since the application was first discussed in April 2011, my clients have also met with owners of the neighbouring properties to discuss their concerns and have responded with amendments. These include:

·        Retention of trees and hedgerows along the site boundary

·        Removal of windows on the gable end of the unit over looking neighbouring property to safeguard the privacy of existing occupiers

·        Amendments to the design of the dwellings to provide hipped roofs

·        Changes to landscaping and materials

The scheme has the full backing of statutory consultees and of officers, who recommend consent given the high standard of design contained in the application. There is also support from local businesses. As stated at the outset, the principle of development on this site is not in question and my client respectfully requests that you approve the reserved matters application before you.

Committee consideration

Local member, Councillor Julia Gooch, asked several in-depth questions relating to surface water drainage, ownership of the lane and trees at the site and whether or not an additional section 106 legal agreement would be imposed on the application. She was advised that no further updates had been received from Severn Trent Water, other than the information on page 84 of agenda, and that the section 106 legal agreement would have been secured at the outline application stage. With regard to the ownership of the lane, the planning officer confirmed that, whilst the highway authority did not actually own the land, the lane to the north-east of the site was a public highway and was therefore publicly maintained. He also confirmed that ownership of the recreation ground had not, as yet, been transferred to the district council and that trees at the site were in the ownership of the county council. Councillor Roger Yeates questioned issues relating to the section 106 legal agreement and advised that such issues were not a consideration for this meeting.

Vote

Conscious that the application related to the approval of reserved matters only, Councillor Terry Glastonbury moved the recommendation and Councillor Lynn Sterry seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

RESOLVED to grant the application permission subject to the conditions included in the schedule of applications and to the information and additional condition included in the late material

For (13)

Councillors James Bevan, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Val Hobman, Brian Jones, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas, and David Thompson.

Against (1)

Councillor Roger Yeates

Abstentions (1)

Councillor Julia Gooch