Proposal: Approval for Reserved Matters of Landscape, Appearance and layout. Application 3/13/0674/OUT (granted on appeal) for construction of 29 residential dwellings.
Minutes:
The application seeking
approval for reserved matters of landscape, appearance and layout for the
construction of 29 residential dwellings was presented by the Planning
Officer. An email from the land owner had
been received on the morning of the committee and this had been circulated to
all committee members prior to the meeting.
There were a number of mature
trees on the site which were the subject of Tree Preservation Orders and there
had been some issues raised during consultation regarding land ownership, but
the Planning Officer was able to confirm that the land was within the ownership
of the applicant.
In 2015, a full permission
had been granted for 3 bungalows on part of the site with a condition to
protect the oak trees, and in 2016, 29 dwellings had been approved in outline at
appeal. A further application to amend
conditions had been dismissed. The 2015
application had lapsed but the 3 bungalows were now proposed again as part of
the 29 dwellings.
There had been 2 neighbour
objections which had already been addressed in the Inspector’s appeal decision.
An element of affordable
housing was proposed and would be located to the west of the site. The proposed road would be private but built
to adoptable standards.
In summary the officer recommendation
was to approve.
Oral representation was
received from Mr Charalambakis, he was concerned
about the possibility of flooding into neighbouring gardens due to the
development and asked about traffic management and yellow lines. He also wanted to know who would be
responsible for compensating him if his fence fell down.
The Major Projects Officer
responded that these concerns had already been considered as part of the outline
application which had been approved by the Inspector, there was a drainage
condition which has not yet been discharged but officers were confident that
this could be dealt with. Traffic on
site had also been considered by the Inspector at appeal and it was concluded
there was no evidence that the local road network could not accommodate the
traffic created by the new development.
Boundaries were a civil matter and not part of granting planning
consent.
The Chairman pointed out that
Dorset Highways would wait a while to see if there was an impact on the area to
decide if yellow lines were needed.
In response to a question
regarding the estate road not being suitable for adoption, members were advised
that due to the requirement of a bridging structure over the tree routes the
Highways authority could not consider it suitable for adoption but would ensure
the construction was to required standards.
This had also been considered in the appeal decision, but the Highways
authority had not wanted to take on the responsibility of the structure.
Officers were confident that
a suitable layout could be put in place to protect trees and cover drainage.
Although some members found
the design of the houses uninspiring, generally they felt that the site
fulfilled the criteria, was workable and manageable.
The affordable housing
contribution was negotiated in the 2016 section 106 agreement and was not
negotiable at reserved matters stage
Proposed by Cllr Bartlett, seconded by Cllr Worth
Decision: that the application be approved subject to
the conditions outlined in the appendix to these minutes.
Supporting documents: