Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

Mr Waite addressed the Committee in objection to the application.

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, subject to no new substantive objections being raised in respect of the amended plans by 28 August 2014, in respect of application 3/14/0970/RP, planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Director confirmed that the Environment Agency and the Council’s engineers remained satisfied that the drainage elements of the application were acceptable.

Councillor J Jones commented on why the application was being determined when the consultation period was ongoing and he queried why this application could not have determined at the September 2014 meeting.  The Director confirmed that the timescale for a major application was 3 months and the application had been received in May.

Councillor Jones questioned whether the 5% increase to 105 dwellings was reasonable and acceptable when the application was originally approved on appeal for 100 dwellings.

Councillor Jones emphasised that the application included 37 x4 bedroom homes whereas the appeals inspector had given weight to the need for additional housing for younger families in Buntingford.  He stated that Officers had noted that such families would be unlikely to afford such large detached homes and there was a proven demand for bungalows.

Councillor Jones commented that the proposed 259 parking spaces was inadequate for the 304 bedrooms provided by this application, especially as most of the 66 garages would be used as garden sheds.

He concluded that there were access issues onto the site and he also referred to the attenuation pond and footpath 21, which those with local knowledge knew could only be used by able bodied people.

The Director advised that some of the issues referred to by Councillor Jones were matters of principle that Members would not be able to revisit in determining this application.  Members were advised that the parking provision was in excess of policy requirements so this reduced any ability for the Authority to seek amendments to this.

The Director reminded Members that the Authority remained in a position where delivery of new housing was modest and in the previous year only around a third of the amount of provision had been delivered.  The Director stated that the application was an acceptable design in an acceptable location and, if Members deferred the matter, it would appear very likely that the same scheme would come back before the Committee with very little changed.

Members were advised that if modest issues were put in front of housing delivery, the Authority would be challenged on an increasingly regular basis for not delivering housing in line with the principal thrust of the NPPF.

Councillors P Moore, K Warnell and K Crofton supported the points made by Councillor Jones.

Councillor J Jones proposed and Councillor S Bull seconded, a motion that application 3/14/0910/RP be deferred to enable further negotiations with the applicant with regard to the house types proposed as part of the development.

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee rejected the recommendation of the Director of Neighbourhood Services as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that, in respect of application 3/14/0970/RP, planning permission be deferred to enable further negotiations with the applicant with regard to the house types proposed as part of the development.