Agenda item

Ward

Halliford and Sunbury West

Proposal

Outline application with approval sought for scale, access and siting, with details of layout, appearance and landscaping reserved, for the demolition of existing buildings and structures, removal of waste transfer facility and the redevelopment of the site for up to 80 residential units and the provision of open space and a play area, plus associated works for landscaping, parking areas, pedestrian, cycle and vehicular routes.

Recommendation

If an appeal had not been lodged against non-determination, the application would have been recommended for refusal. The reasons for refusal will form the basis of the Council’s case at the planning appeal.

Description:

Outline application with approval sought for scale, access and siting, with details of layout, appearance and landscaping reserved, for the demolition of existing buildings and structures, removal of waste transfer facility and the redevelopment of the site for up to 80 residential units and the provision of open space and a play area, plus associated works for landscaping, parking areas, pedestrian, cycle and vehicular routes.

Additional Information:

Paul Tomson, Team Leader, Planning Development Management reported on the following updates:

1.  One late letter of objection has been received. The issues raised are already covered in the report.

2.  A consultation response has been received from the Group Head of Neighbourhood Services regarding bin collection. She raises no objection subject to the imposition of a condition to prevent the turning area at the end of the new roadway from being used for parking.

3.  A letter has been received from the applicant setting out the background to the case and setting out why he disagrees with each reason for refusal in the Committee report: - Inappropriate development in the Green Belt; housing mix; and the impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties.

The note under the reasons for refusal on page 67 should refer to ‘reasons for refusal’ at the end rather than ‘conditions’.

Public Speaking:

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for speaking at meetings, Edward Ledwidge spoke for the proposed development raising the following key points:

-The applicant had worked positively with the council in its preparation of the emerging Local Plan 2022-2037

-The scheme achieved all draft site allocation requirements which included 80 homes and 50% affordable housing and the strategic gap

-A non-determination appeal was submitted due to delays in the Local Plan process

-The scheme was an appropriate development in the Green Belt

-This scheme allowed for the complete redevelopment of previously developed land with no greater impact on openness

-Extant permission did not set a limit on what was regarded as appropriate development 

-This scheme was justified considering special circumstances related to the Council’s worsening housing land supply

-The objection to the housing unit mix was an aged policy requirement which no longer reflected housing needs

-The applicant had responded to the current housing needs

Debate:

During the debate the following key issues were raised:

-The proposed landscaping reflected a better use of land

-This site rewarded the process of creating hard standing ground and turning this into housing

-This was an overdevelopment

-Local residents were not supportive of this application

-The application made no reference to providing any social or key worker housing

-The principle of developing on Green Belt was unacceptable

-The incentive of a playground on site offered in a previous application was omitted from the current scheme

-The design and appearance of the site was poor

-Concern was raised of how the open space would be managed

-Concern was raised regarding remediation of the waste transfer created at the rear of the site

-It was unlikely that local people could afford detached three to four bedroom dwellings

The Committee voted on the motion as follows:

For: 13

Against: 0

Abstain: 2

Decision:

The application would have been refused had the Council been able to formally determine it. The reasons for refusal will form the basis of the Council’s case at Planning Appeal.