Agenda item

Construction of 760 dwellings, public open space (including play space and landscape planting), allotments, an orchard, sports pitch provision, with associated changing rooms and car parking, pedestrian, cycle and vehicular links, drainage works and associated infrastructure (Reserved matters application to determine appearance, landscaping, layout and scale following the grant of Outline planning permission number WD/D/17/000986)

Prior to consideration of the item, the Chairman sought a Vice-Chairman for this given that the Vice-Chairman, Cllr Bill Pipe, was unable to take part owing to his association with a client who had objected to the application. On that basis, Cllr Susan cocking proposed Jon Worth - this being seconded by Cllr Louis O’Leary. There being no further nominations, Cllr Jon Worth was appointed as Vice-Chairman for the item.

 

The Committee considered application P/RES/2021/04848 for the construction of 760 dwellings, public open space (including play space and landscape planting), allotments, an orchard, sports pitch provision, with associated changing rooms and car parking, pedestrian, cycle and vehicular links, drainage works and associated infrastructure in the development of land at Foundry Lea (Vearse Farm), Bridport. This was a Reserved Matters application to determine appearance, landscaping, layout and scale, following the grant of Outline Planning Permission (OPP) - number WD/D/17/000986. How any decision made would be enacted and the reasons for this was also explained.

 

Officers drew the attention of the Committee to the planning history of the site, in that OPP had been granted by the former West Dorset District Council in 2017. Accordingly, it was confirmed, and emphasised, that this application sought approval for the Reserved Matters pursuant to the OPP permission and should be the focus of the Committee’s considerations.

 

With the aid of a visual presentation – and taking into account the provisions of the Update Sheet circulated to members prior to the meeting - officers provided context of what the main proposals, principles and planning issues of the development were; how these were to be progressed; how the development would contribute to meeting housing needs; and what this entailed. The presentation took into account the policies against which this application was being assessed, - in complying with the West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan, the Bridport Area Neighbourhood Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) – and particularly how it accorded with the junction layout, parameter, green infrastructure, scale & density plans approved with the OPP that were derived from a Masterplan for the scheme.

 

The Committee were informed that as the principle of the development had been deemed acceptable, it was solely now the Reserved Matters that were for consideration:

·        principle,

·        appearance,

·        landscaping,

·        layout – housing/ community infrastructure; roads, footpaths and cycleways; foul and surface water drainage; affordable housing and self build

·        scale

 

Plans and photographs provided an illustration of the location, orientation, density, dimensions – form, bulk, size and mass - and appearance of the development and of the individual properties, with examples being given of how typical properties would be designed within the five distinctive character areas, along with their ground floor plans; how it would look; proposed street scenes; the materials to be used; energy efficiency enhancements; affordable housing provision; self-build provision; access and highway considerations; infrastructure and amenity considerations and provision; environmental and biodiversity considerations; the means of landscaping; and its setting within that part of the Bridport area - which was incorporated within the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. What financial and amenity benefits there were to be under the S106 agreements and that there would be provision of a roundabout as part of the enhancement works on the A35 at the Miles Cross junction were explained.

 

Officers showed the development’s relationship with other adjacent residential development in Bridport and Vearse Farm itself - in how that, and the Toll House, would be accommodated within the scheme. The characteristics and topography of the site was shown and its relationship with the highway network and to properties in the adjoining roads in particular. Views into the site and around it were shown, which provided a satisfactory understanding of all that was necessary. How the development was to be divided between 2021 and 2025 building regulations, and the reasons for this, was explained.

 

Whilst this application was for the residential development only, mention was also made that separate and subsequent applications were likely to be made in respect of the employment development and school that had been provided for in the Outline permission.

 

In summary, officers planning assessment adjudged the proposed development to be of an appropriate appearance, layout, landscaping and scale and that issues and concerns that had previously been identified had since been addressed and, in there being no material considerations which would warrant refusal of this application, this formed the basis of the officer’s recommendation in seeking approval of the application.

 

As part of the consideration of the merits of the application, Councillor Paul Kimber requested a site visit be held on the grounds that the Committee should see at first-hand how the layout of the site would look and how highway issues could be addressed, so as to have a better understanding in coming to their decision. Calls for a site visit were supported by Councillor Jean Dunseith. The Solicitor outlined the protocol for the requirement of a site visit and asked for reasons why those proposing and seconding it thought it necessary. He felt that the reasons raised had already been addressed satisfactorily and that there would otherwise be little benefit in arranging this at this stage. On that basis – and on being put to the vote - the Committee also did not feel this to be necessary, considering that they already had enough information to be able to come to a decision.

 

Formal consultation on the application had seen a neutral stance from Bridport Town Council and Symondsbury Parish Council, whilst Char Valley Parish Council made comment. However, Allington Parish Council had objected on highways and access, infrastructure and overdevelopment grounds.

 

The Committee then received public representations.

 

Barry Bates, resident, felt that a number of issues had not been sufficiently addressed and that the development was being expedited unnecessarily. He asked that there be an independent assessment for sewage and the detailed plans to be agreed, as well as how the roundabout construction traffic would be managed. 

 

John Guy, resident, considered that the S106 infrastructure and amenity – school, care home, employment land - should all be in place before the development took place so as that provision would be readily available from the start.

 

John Grantham, resident, considered the scheme should not be using productive farmland for the development and should have more energy efficient provision from the start. Given the expected increase in growth to Bridport in attracting visitors, the scheme would have insufficient infrastructure to cope. He also considered pedestrian provision access from the north to be compromised and suggested a site visit to see this at first hand.

Mr Summerton considered the scheme should be more environmentally friendly and energy efficient too and that the energy infrastructure would find it challenging to bear this extra load.

 

Gavin Fryer raised concerns at how environmental considerations would be addressed and that flooding and water management had not been taken into account enough. As there was still uncertainty over infrastructure and other outstanding material considerations to be determined, he considered that the application should be deferred until these were resolved. 

 

Guy Dickenson, Chairman of West Dorset CPRE, considered the way the development of housing was being divided between 2021 and 2025 building regulations meant that full advantage was not being taken of energy efficiencies and environmental opportunities. Moreover, the needs of the AONB were being compromised.

 

Catherine Pennington, for one of the applicants, emphasised the collaboration with all those involved in the project, local residents included, had been much appreciated by the applicants who were now in a position to deliver this much needed scheme: designed to contribute considerable direct and indirect benefits to the economy. Issues raised previously had now had the opportunity to be addressed satisfactorily, with there now being the provision of 206 affordable homes, which was in excess of the Section 106 requirements. Key additional benefits within the section 106 were emphasised including environmental, energy efficiency and ecological and biodiversity gains. She assured the Committee that the applicants would continue to work collaboratively with local authorities and the community post any planning decision.

 

David Mathews on behalf of landowner Philip Kerr, confirmed that the responsibility of servicing the needs of the land was taken seriously, in understanding the engagement processes, so as to meet those obligations.

 

Cllr Paul Hartmann, Symondsbury Parish Council, whilst recognising there was no perfect solution, considered the application to be as good as it could be, in addressing concerns raised and in providing housing, environmental and infrastructure enhancements, although he hoped there could be a fully integrated development in time which took account of the development already there in Bridport so that this site became integral to and complemented Bridport, rather than being self-contained. He was pleased to see that a successful local solution had been developed that would contribute positively to Bridport.

 

Whilst recognising that this application had become notably contentious over a number of years, having heard what was said, officers responded to some of the pertinent issues raised, being confident that each one could be addressed by the provisions of the application.

 

The opportunity was given for members to ask questions of the presentation

and what they had heard, in seeking clarification of aspects so as to have a better understanding in coming to a decision; these being:-

·        access and highway safety considerations and how these had been assessed and evaluated

·        what prospect there was for even greater enhanced energy efficacy provision, such as more PV solar panels and ground source heat pumps, electricity charging points for vehicles; and rainwater collection, being disappointed at what traditional fossil fuel proposals there still were

·        how the outstanding S106 issues would be addressed by the applicant and what assurance there was that these would be delivered satisfactorily as proposed

·        how the energy generation and provision – electricity and water – to serve such a major development would be able to be achieved satisfactorily and what, assessments and assurances there were from energy companies that this could be delivered as necessary

·        what impact the development would have on existing infrastructure and amenity and how this would be managed

 

Th e three local Ward members served on the Committee – Cllrs Dave Bolwell, Sarah Williams and Kelvin Clayton and the issues they raised individually were part of the considerations and clarifications set out above

 

Officers confirmed that much of the context of the objections and issues raised related to aspects of the already agreed OPP – the opportunity for which to consider had since passed – and reiterated that, it was the Reserved Matters that should be the sole focus for Committee. Highway officers confirmed too that the scheme had been fully assessed and evaluated, with mitigation as necessary to address the concerns raised. Again, moreover, all highway considerations – movements; flows; congestion and safety - had been established at the outline stage.

 

Officers addressed the questions raised providing what they considered to be satisfactory answers, which the Committee understood to be, and saw, as generally acceptable.

 

The Solicitor advised that any conditions requiring renewable energy measures required a policy basis and that it was a matter for members to determine the weight to be given to the Council’s emerging policy on this.

 

From debate, whilst a number of the Committee would have preferred to see greater more environmental and highway enhancements, they understood that much of this had already been determined at the outline stage and that - in focusing on the Reserved Matters only - this had to be seen to be acceptable and there were no grounds for refusal on that basis. They accepted that the housing provision would contribute significantly towards meeting the residential needs of Bridport and targets set by the Council.

 

Having had the opportunity to discuss the merits of the application, having

understood what was being proposed and the reasoning for this; having taken

into account the officer’s report and presentation, the written representations; and what they had heard at the meeting, and having received satisfactory answers to questions raised, the Committee were satisfied in their understanding of what the proposal entailed and the reasoning for this and, on that basis - and being proposed by Councillor Susan Cocking and seconded by Councillor John Worth - on being put to the vote, the Committee agreed - by 8:2 - with one abstention, that the application should be approved, subject to the conditions set out in the paragraph of the report  the provisions of the Update Sheet and taking into account the issues raised by committee that were pertinent to this application.

 

Resolved

That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning and the Service Manager for Development Management and Enforcement for the approval of reserved matters, subject to the discharge of any outstanding conditions on the outline planning permission (WD/D/17/000986) which are required to be discharged prior to the approval of the reserved matters (conditions 2 for the phasing, 6 for a Design Code, 7 for the LEMP, 38 for the road crossings over the river and 39 for floor levels of the dwellings) and subject to conditions as set out in this report - and in the Update Sheet - with the relevant plan number and revision number to be entered in conditions no. 2, 3 and 4.

 

Reasons for Decision
· The proposed development was considered to be of an appropriate appearance, layout and scale, with appropriate landscaping incorporated. As such, the proposed development was considered to be in accordance with local and national policy objectives.
· The appearance of the housing, with five distinctive character areas, would respond to the appearance of housing in Bridport.
· The layout of the housing, community infrastructure, movement network, drainage and affordable housing would meet the requirements necessary for the scheme to function and integrate with Bridport.
· The landscaping would conserve and enhance the AONB, biodiversity and existing trees and hedges and provide appropriate new planting.
· The scale would be appropriate to the characteristics of the site including the lie of the land and location within it.
· The proposal would comply with the West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan, the Bridport Area Neighbourhood Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
· Paragraph 11 of the NPPF set out that permission should be granted for sustainable development unless specific policies in the NPPF indicate otherwise.
· There were no material considerations which would warrant refusal of this application.