Agenda item

Application for Determination: -

Reserved Matters application (for details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for a 50 unit residential development with open space including orchard, cycleways, footpaths, and associated works (pursuant to outline planning permission ref. 13/01032/OUT).

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report detailing a reserved matters application (for details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) for a 50-unit residential development with open space including orchard, cycleways, footpaths, and associated works (pursuant to outline planning permission ref. 13/01032/OUT).

A local resident addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.

An agent of Asbri Planning addressed the Committee in favour of the application on behalf of the applicant.

The Principal Planning Officer responded to members questions regarding an orchard on the site, concerns about compliance with condition 5 of the outline permission, affordable housing, and sewage disposal in the area as follows:

-        The orchard would be a part of the public open space, which would come across to the City Council.

-        There was a separate condition in the outline application to provide a scheme for the orchard.

-        Trees in a good enough condition would be retained. 

-        The tree officer had looked at the scheme and had confirmed that he was happy with the planting arrangement.

-        Regarding Condition 5, there was an overlap on one of the buildings which was ‘undesirable’ but did not cause any significant planning harm and would not warrant refusal of the reserved matters application on its own. 

-        Severn Trent had not submitted any comments on the application.

-        Surface water would outfall from the northeast of the site to existing ponds.

-        The number of shared units listed in a table on the site layout had a typographical error.

-        There was a clear intention to correct the site layout to make it consistent with the s106 agreement.

Members Debate

-        A member stated that he was concerned about the lack of clarity in the late material regarding affordable housing. He stated that he thought that the reserved matters application should therefore be deferred and that he would otherwise vote against the officer’s recommendation.

-        A member said that he believed that the reserved matters application should go back to the architects and the applicant to ensure that the buffer zone in the original outline application was kept; otherwise, he would vote against the officer’s recommendation.

-        The Vice-Chair stated that he sympathised with previous members points but was broadly happy with the reserved matters application and would, therefore, probably vote in favour of the officer’s recommendation.

-        A member stated that she was originally going to agree with the officer’s recommendation but now believed that the application should be deferred.

Councillor Hyman proposed and Councillor Walford seconded a motion to defer the application for the applicant to revise the reserved matters application so that the buffer zone in the original outline was kept and for the affordable housing mix to be resolved. 

Upon that motion being lost on the Chairman’s casting vote, the Chair moved, and the Vice Chair seconded a motion to delegate approval as the Officer’s recommendation in the late material.

Upon that motion being lost, the Chair moved, and Councillor Hyman seconded a motion to defer the application for the affordable housing mix and layout to be resolved.

RESOLVED that: - The application is deferred for the affordable housing mix and layout to be resolved.