Agenda item

Outline planning application with all matters reserved except for access for the redevelopment of 2morrow Court for residential purposes.

The committee considered planning application P23/V2576/O for outline planning application with all matters reserved except for access for the redevelopment of 2morrow Court for residential purposes on land at Entree Global Services, Appleford Road, Sutton Courtenay.

 

Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting.

 

The planning officer introduced the report and highlighted that the application sought to establish the principle of development for up to 17 dwellings and associated access, with all other matters indicative at this stage. She advised the committee that the application was before them due to the objection of the parish council. The planning officer informed the committee that the main areas for objection related to overdevelopment of the site, connectivity of the site with the surrounding area and a need to wait for the outcome of the Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF1) inquiry. She confirmed that responses to these concerns were set out in full in the officer’s report.

 

The planning officer informed the committee that the main issue with the application was the proposed loss of employment space in line with policy CP29 of the adopted Local Plan 2031. She advised a viability assessment had been submitted with the application which demonstrated that via direct marketing of the site only four enquiries had come forward. The site was deemed unsuitable for business use as a better property was available within the area. The officer informed the committee that no technical objections had been raised on the basis of loss of employment space.

 

The planning officer went on to inform the committee that no objections had been received from the local highway’s authority. The proposal made use of the existing site access and the change in movements would not be a significant change from the existing use. The planning officer went on to advise that some development could be permitted prior to HIF1, advising that guidance now allowed for tier 3 developments of 10 or more houses are no longer to be objected to on highways grounds as HIF1 funding had been secured. Applications of this type should therefore be assessed based on their merits.

 

The planning officer informed the committee that all dwellings in the proposal fell within flood zone 1 but that a proposed area of open space fell within flood zone 2 as confirmed by the flood risk assessment submitted with the application. She confirmed that the Environment Agency had no objection subject to proposed conditions.

 

The planning officer then advised the committee that since the submission of the application the Sutton Courtenay Neighbourhood Plan had been approved via referendum. She confirmed that full weight had been given to the Sutton Courtenay Neighbourhood Plan since it’s approval at referendum even though it had not yet been adopted by Council.

 

Hugo Raworth spoke on behalf of Sutton Courtenay Parish Council, objecting to the application.

 

Ellie Neil, the agent representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

 

The committee asked the planning officer to confirm if the application site was a brownfield site. The planning officer confirmed that it was.

 

The committee asked the planning officer to comment on any noise implications the development may have. The planning officer confirmed that the Environmental Health team had been consulted and the application had been accompanied with a noise impact assessment. She confirmed that a Construction Management Plan would be required and that noise mitigation measures would form part of a reserved matters application should the application be approved.

 

The committee asked the planning officer to confirm that there were no objections from statutory consultees. She confirmed this to be the case.

 

The committee went on to ask the planning officer to clarify why the Hobbyhorse Lane development had been restricted in advance of HIF1 but it was deemed this application for 17 dwellings did not need to be. The planning officer advised that 17 dwellings was relatively modest. She also advised that the local highways authority had suggested obligations to mitigate the impact of the development. The planning manager advised the committee that the two sites differed as Hobbyhorse Lane was a greenfield site whereas the application before the committee was brownfield and the traffic trip rate information generated from the current employment indicated a net loss when changing from employment to residential.

 

The committee asked the planning officer what it was able to do to ensure that the footpath connection identified by residents came forward. The planning officer advised that it would have ideally been considered as part of the wider masterplan for the area. She confirmed that the indicative layout submitted showed a path there and it was understood there a was path on the other side of this, but that they had no control over adjacent sites. She advised it was to be explored under the relevant condition.

 

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was carried on being put to the vote.

 

The committee commented that the site was currently classified as a brownfield site and that the applicant had demonstrated alternative uses had been considered. The committee also noted the local and national need for homes and this site presented an opportunity to deliver homes.

 

The committee noted that Sutton Courtenay was arguably overloaded with traffic and over developed for the infrastructure which was in place and questioned if it would be sensible to wait for the result of the HIF1 inquiry. Other members noted that the application was before them now and that there is traffic throughout the entire district, not just in Sutton Courtenay.

 

The committee reflected that it would be better for the site to be used for housing which included affordable housing than as an employment site. Whilst questions had been raised about the robustness of the marketing report the committee concluded it was not their place to second guess the opinion of the economic development officer.

 

The committee also noted that the S106 agreement would secure funding for transport improvement including to bus services.

 

RESOLVED: to approve planning application P23/V2576/O, subject to completion of a S106 Legal Agreement to secure Affordable Housing, Public open space, Local Area of Play, Public Art, and Financial contributions for education, transport, street naming and waste, and the following conditions:

 

1.    Commencement outline permission

2.    Approved plans       

3.    Reserved Matters to be approved       

4.    Access and Vision Splays       

5.    Construction Traffic Management Plan

6.    Construction Management Plan       

7.    Green Travel Plans       

8.    Maximum number of dwellings       

9.    Housing Mix       

10.Space Standard       

11.Ridge Heights (Two storey)       

12.Landscaping (incl. hard surfacing and boundary treatment)       

13.Landscape Management Plan       

14.Tree Protection (General)       

15.Tree Species and Tree Pits       

16.Biodiversity Enhancement Plan       

17.Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Strategy (Outline)       

18.Construction Enhancement Management Plan       

19.Wildlife Protection (mitigation as approved)       

20.Public Open Space and Play Areas       

21.Lighting Scheme       

22.Noise Assessment and Mitigation

23.Contamination Remediation Strategy       

24.Verification Report     

25.Previously unidentified contamination       

26.Infiltration      

27.Boreholes       

28.SWD scheme in accordance with Calibro report       

29.Detailed sustainable drainage scheme       

30.SUDS Compliance Report       

31.Foul Water Drainage       

32.Gas Fired Boilers     

 

Informative 

33.Informative - CIL Vale       

34.Informative - Highways details       

35.Informative - Legal Agreement (S106)       

36.Informative - Secure by Design and Crime Prevention       

37.Informative - Contaminated Land       

38.Informative - Thames Water pressure       

39.Informative - Trees and Streetlights

Informative - Informative - Key Neighbourhood Plan Policies