Agenda item

Outline application for residential development (up to 85 dwellings), access to Chain Hill, internal estate roads, parking, landscaping and open space.

Recommended: to delegate authority to grant planning permission to the head of planning, in consultation with the committee chairman and vice-chairman, subject to completing a section 106 agreement with both the county council and the district council to secure contributions towards strategic highway improvements, local infrastructure, and the affordable housing, and also subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

Councillor Gervase Duffield entered the meeting.

The officer presented her report on outline application for residential development (up to 85 dwellings), access onto Chain Hill, internal estate roads, parking, landscaping and open space. Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and planning history are detailed in the officer’s report which formed part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Updates from the report

·        Two further letters of objection had been received, which raised similar concerns as previous letters;

·        The resolution and conditions had been amended to take account of the time limits for permission, as agreed under urgent business, earlier in the meeting.

Councillor D Jackson from Wantage Town Council, spoke, objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·        Increase of traffic on Chain Hill;

·        Suitability of pedestrian access by widening the pavement which will, in turn, narrow the road and reduce traffic access. There is already a significant amount of affordable housing in Wantage;

·        The open landscaped area of the application site is in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and could be used as a dumping site.

Ben Rendell and Julie Mabberley, local residents, spoke objecting to the application. Their concerns included the following:

·        Impact on the landscape as the application site is partially in the AONB;

·        The application is not sustainable as there are insufficient community facilities, schools, jobs, carp spaces, bus stops etc.

Tony Charles of Porchester Planning Consultancy, the applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application. He raised the following points:

·        All of the housing would be outside of the AONB;

·        The open space would be informal meadowland and would either be conveyanced to the town or district council or managed by a management company;

·        Section 106 agreements would provide infrastructure money, including schooling.

Councillor Jenny Hannaby made a statement before withdrawing to the public gallery. She did not take part in the discussion or vote on this item. The concerns she raised were as follows:

·        The application site was good agricultural land;

·        The application site was partially in, and bordered on, the AONB;

·        Road safety, congestion and access;

·        Lack of school places.

Councillor Fiona Roper, one of the ward councillors, spoke objecting to the application.

The committee considered this application in detail. In particular, it was considered in the context of:

·        The size of the application site;

·        The need for a 5 year housing land supply;

·        The National Planning Policy Framework;

·        The need for additional school places which the chairman would raise under delegated powers when discussing the Section 106 agreements;

·        The need to re-consult the county highways engineer on the adequacy of the footpath width. 

RESOLVED (for 7; against 3; abstentions 1)

To authorise the head of planning in consultation with the committee chairman, vice-chairman and local ward members, to grant planning permission, subject to the completion a section 106 agreement with both the county council and the district council within 4 months of resolution, to secure contributions towards strategic highway improvements, local infrastructure, and the affordable housing, and also subject to the following conditions:

1.      Time limit – Outline application (implementation within 12 months of the date of the decision).

2.      Standard outline condition (excluding access) – Reserved matters to be submitted in a timely fashion, within 12 months.

3.      Approved plans.

4.      MC24 - Drainage details (surface and foul).

5.      MC29 - Sustainable drainage scheme.

6.      Submission of biodiversity management plan.

7.      HY3 – Submission of visibility splays.

8.      Provision of footpath and crossing prior to commencement on site in accordance with details to be submitted.

9.      LS1 – Landscaping scheme (submission).

10. LS2 – Landscaping scheme (implementation and management).

11. Construction traffic management plan.

12. Full details of the proposed new access including regrading the bank both along the roadside and within the site.

13. Submission of residential travel plan.

14. Submission of waste water drainage strategy including time frame for implementation.

15. Submission of traffic calming measures along Chain Hill.

16. LS4 – Tree protection scheme.

17. Provision of a Local Area of Play within the site.

18. Boundary treatment details.

19. No development shall commence until Thames Water survey works have been undertaken.