Agenda item

(Wards Affected: Faringdon and the Coxwells)

The Committee was advised that should it be minded to approve the application an informative should be added to require permeable surfaces within the site.

Mr Best made a statement objecting to the application raising concerns relating to matters already covered in the report. He referred to the lack of notice of consideration of the application at the Committee this evening due to the postal strike and explained that there were other people who objected to the proposal.  He referred to the numbers of objected advising that residents were unaware of the need to repeat objections at each stage of the application.  Mr Best particularly raised concern regarding  access across a privately owned car park; traffic; car parking; accessibility for large vehicles including emergency and service vehicles; and lack of pedestrian walk way in Walnut Court and hence pedestrian safety.

The Officers clarified that the car park was a private car park and that right of access was a legal matter and not a material planning consideration.

One of the local Members spoke against the application raising concerns regarding the proposed waste collection arrangements.  He commented that in agreeing this application residents would be excluded from a public service and that they should be entitled to a rebate on their Council Tax. He considered that a private arrangement was not a satisfactory solution.  However, he commented that should the Committee be minded to approve the application the resurfacing of Walnut Court should be required and its adoption investigated.

Another local Member spoke in support of the application.  Whilst accepting that the access into the site was tight there would be no overlooking and the proposal was acceptable. He considered that resurfacing Walnut Court would be beneficial and agreed that this should be sought. 

In response to a question raised the Officers advised that if the waste collection service provided was not consider adequate enforcement action could be taken.

Some Members spoke against the application making the following comments: -

·                    It was not desirable to build houses which could not access public services.

·                    A S106 Agreement did not seem a satisfactory way to secure a waste collection service.  In response the Officers advised that the S106 Agreement would run with the land regardless of its ownership.

·                    There was concern regarding access and parking in Walnut Court. 

·                    A speed hump was suggested to slow vehicles in view of concerns regarding pedestrian safety.  The Officers emphasised that there had been no objection from the CountyEngineer.

Other Members spoke in support of the application commenting that any private waste collection service should include recycling waste.

By 10 votes to 3 with 2 abstentions it was

RESOLVED

that the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) in consultation with the Chair and / or Vice-Chair of the Development Control Committee be delegated authority to approve application GFA/10178/2 subject to: -

(1)      consideration to traffic calming measures along the access to the site;

(2)      a S106 Agreement to secure a suitable waste collection arrangements to include recycling;

(3)      the conditions in the report; and

(4)      an informative regarding permeable surfaces within the site.