The application sought outline planning permissions for redevelopment of the site for the provision of up to 75 dwellings with vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access, internal access roads, footpaths, cycle ways, parking, public open space, landscaping and drainage infrastructure.  The application had been submitted with all matters reserved except for access, which was for consideration. 

The applicant had worked with the Education and Housing officer during the process of the application. A contribution of just under £176,000 had been agreed with the Education Officer. The applicant had also agreed to a policy compliant 35% affordable housing comprising 26 dwellings, with a 50 / 50 split between affordable rented accommodation and intermediate tenures. The Principal Officer confirmed that the report was recommended for approval subject to conditions and the above contributions towards education and provision of affordable housing.

Councillor Hamilton sought clarity that there was to be one vehicular access route and one route for pedestrian / cycle access.  This was confirmed to be correct.  Councillor Hamilton expressed concern that this would not be adequate.  The Principal Highways Engineer advised the Committee that for the proposed number of dwellings 1 access route was acceptable, and would not need to be increased unless there were 200+ dwellings proposed.  Devonshire Road was a very high category road and therefore was deemed to be suitable, and preferable to another junction on London Road, given queue lengths at the existing junction.

Councillor Ojetola queried whether the current 40mph speed limit would be reduced to 30 mph with the introduction of a new junction.  The Principal Highways Engineer agreed that it would conceivably be appropriate to reduce the speed for the proposed section of Devonshire Road, which was within the single lane per direction stretch.

Councillor Ojetola also queried the provision of green space available.  Members were advised that, while the plan at present was indicative and might not be final, the Planning department was satisfied that the space could fit the proposed number of units with adequate gardens. 

Councillor Piccolo highlighted the remaining parcel of green space and asked whether it might be developed at a later stage.  Members were advised that the land was in close proximity to the NuStar fuel storage (COMAH) site and for that reason the area could not be developed at this time. However it may be able to be developed in the future.  Councillor Hamilton asked if it might be used as parkland. Members were advised that  the proximity to the fuel tanks made it unsuitable for public use.

The Chair asked whether trees along the back of the site were existing or to be planted.  The Principal Officer advised that some were existing and would be part of landscaping and screening for the development.

Councillor Ojetola queried the catchment schools, which were confirmed to be Hathaway Academy, William Edwards, Grays Convent, Harris Academy and Gateway Academy.

A resident, Michelle Peters, was invited to the Committee to present her statement of objection.

The Ward Councillor, Councillor Gerrish, was invited to present his statement in objection.

The agent, James Lawson, was invited to the Committee to present his statement of support.

Councillor Hamilton noted comments around badger activity in the vicinity and asked if there was any evidence.  The Principal Planner confirmed that there had been ecology and protected species surveys undertaken highlighting badger activity to the north of the site. Methods to protect and provide habitats would be ,  secured through updates to the ecology reports as part of conditions on any approval.

Councillor Ojetola asked where the rear access to gardens for properties in Moore Avenue was located, and whether overlooking had been taken into consideration.  There would be trees and boundary treatments to keep the site separate.  In regards to back to back distances these were 45-50m which was well in excess of the Council’s minimum standards and thus deemed to be acceptable.

The Chair asked whether traffic issues on London Road could be material considerations.  Members were advised that there were air quality management areas along London Road.  The revised traffic assessment submitted gave a positive picture but highlighted concerns around cycle and pedestrian access, hence the incorporation of a cycle route onto London Road.

Councillor Piccolo queried the possibility of the proposed new junction on Devonshire Road including a “left turn only” restriction.  The Principal Highways Engineer explained that in order to do so, due to the need for physical enforcement measures, it would have to be left in/left out which would force incoming traffic to use London Road and the Lakeside basin.  It would also increase the risk of vehicles performing illegal U-turns to avoid this.

Councillor Rice stressed the need to reduce the speed at the junction to 30mph to ensure safety for residents.  The Committee was assured that Condition 19 would cover speed reduction measures. 

Councillor Ojetola sought clarification around the provision of a play area.  The details were to be submitted later however condition 10 regarding public open space included provision of an area for children’s play.

The Chair noted that, while the green area was presently too close to the tanks to be developed there was a possibility of more homes on the site in future, but accepted that that would need to be considered on its own merit at a later stage.

The Vice-Chair saw no reason to object to homes being built on site.  There was a need for homes in the borough and while there was traffic at peak times, since the A13 works had ended issues were greatly reduced and so he offered support for the application.

Councillor Rice considered that the Committee’s hands were somewhat tied.  The site had been identified within the Core Strategy and the application was reasonable.  His only concern had been addressed within condition 19 and therefore he supported the application, as he could not see grounds otherwise.

Councillor Ojetola expressed his view that, while it was only at outline stage, it was best to do as much as possible to mitigate against any concerns.  He therefore urged the applicant and officers to address issues around rear access to gardens, whether anything could be done to improve the situation at the junction of London Road and Devonshire Road, and the crucial reduction of the speed limit to 30mph.

Councillor B. Little agreed that the highways network in the area could use some work, particularly where the 1 lane became 2.  Reducing the speed limit to 30mph would be key.  He also welcomed the provision of affordable homes and offered support for the application.

Councillor Piccolo admitted he was concerned regarding safety at the egress, however site splays and speed reductions had addressed his concerns.  He understood residents’ feelings but noted that there had been previous applications approved on other sites where there had been less generous space; he was minded to approve the application.

The Chair was interested to protect the additional parcel of green space where possible. He echoed the Committee’s comments; without clear material considerations Members were somewhat restricted however the provision of affordable housing was welcome.  The next stage would be for a reserved matters application to be presented for approval by the Committee and the Chair expressed his view that he liked the current proposed design.

It was proposed by the Vice-Chair and seconded by Councillor B. Little that the application be approved, subject to conditions and the completion of a s.106 legal agreement, as per the Officer’s recommendation:

For:                 Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), Steve Liddiard (Vice-Chair), Tunde Ojetola, Terry Piccolo, Gerard Rice, Graham Snell and Brian Little

Against:         Councillor Graham Hamilton.

Abstained:     (0)

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved, subject to conditions and the completion of a s.106 legal agreement.