Agenda item

Application to modify legal agreement dated 18 February 2021 ( PA 3/17/3609/OUT) variation of S106 to 'swap’ the order of SANG delivery, requiring the following changes:

 

- Swap the references to SANG A and B on Plan 1

- Reverse references to SANG A and B in the definitions (where there is a distinction in the wording between the two types of SANG)

- Reverse the Successors in Title paragraphs 7.3.3 and 7.3.4

- Reverse the definitions in Schedule 6 (including the certificate/practical completion and step-in maintenance contribution references)

- Swap S6 Parts 2 and 3 and reverse the SANG references therein.

- Mechanism inserted to secure the 2ha of temporary grassland is planted across the old SANG A (what will be SANG B).

 

With the aid of a visual presentation including plans and aerial photographs, the Lead Project Officer identified the site and explained the proposal, which was to swap the delivery of SANG A and B that had previously been given approval.

 

The planning history of the site was outlined and it was explained that the SANGs made up part of a wider development that had been given approval and due to changes in the construction phase of the development the applicant was requesting to change the order of delivery of the SANGs. Photographs of the SANG were provided, showing that it was under construction. The changes proposed were explained to members.

 

The Lead Project Officer explained that consultees, including Natural England and the Dorset Council Heathland Mitigation team, had no objections to the application. There had been a number of objections based on the impact on neighbouring amenity, however it was considered that the screening capabilities of the western SANG were limited and that the construction of the dwellings was controlled by the approved construction management plan.   

 

Public representation was received in objection to the application from Mr Elliott, Cllr Barber on behalf of West Parley Parish Council and Cllr Parry the local Ward Member. They expressed concern that the developer was trying to maximise profit at the expense of delivering the initially agreed scheme and that there had been poor communication between the developer and local residents. They also considered that the parking provision was insufficient for the site and that access to the site would be unsafe while construction was still ongoing on the rest of the development.

 

Mr Nash spoke in support of the application, as the agent for the application. He noted that there had been changes to the construction of the site, that required the delivery of the SANG’s to change and that the applicant had agreed to deliver a larger SANG area than was required for the size of the development. He also noted the changes to the planning obligation allowed for the occupation of the affordable housing on site, which had recently been completed.

 

The Heathland Mitigation Officer clarified that there was a two-hectare space of grassland, which provided access to the SANG for existing residents and that it had been agreed with the Site Manager to install signage to make it clear that people were able to cross the site, while construction was ongoing nearby. It was also noted that the SANGs would be maintained by the developer until they were transferred to a management body.

 

In response to members questions, the Lead Project Officer provided the following responses.

 

·       The application was to change the delivery of the SANG, so the applicant was entitled to start construction under the previous approval.

·       Outline permission was granted for the site under a different applicant and the current applicant had since taken over the site.

·       Both SANGs were secured by a S106 legal agreement, so an application would have to be brought to committee if the applicant no longer wanted to deliver both SANGs.

·       The parking, access and layout for the site had been agreed under the outline permission and was not a part of the application under consideration.

 

Several members expressed concern that the access to the SANG for members of the public may be unsafe, particularly while construction was ongoing elsewhere on the site.

 

The meeting adjourned to allow officers to construct a suitable form of wording to reflect the concern raised by members. 11:00 – 11:13

 

It was proposed by Cllr Coombs and seconded by Cllr Sowry-House to Grant as per the officer recommendation with the addition that the SANG management plan also be required to include safe access for the public during construction of the whole development across the 2ha SANG entrance area to the eastern SANG with details delegated to the Head of service in consultation with the Committee chair.

 

Proposed by Cllr Coombs and seconded by Cllr Sowry-House.

 

Decision:

 

A)   That permission be granted subject to the completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in a form to be agreed by the legal services manager to amend planning conditions as follows and with the addition that the SANG management plan also be required to include safe access for the public during construction of the whole development across the 2ha SANG entrance area to the eastern SANG with details delegated to the Head of service in consultation with the Committee chair:

 

-       Swap the references to SANG A and B on Plan 1.

-       Reverse references to SANG A and B in the definitions (where there is a distinction in the wording between the two types of SANG).

-       Reverse the Successors in Title paragraphs 7.3.3 and 7.3.4.

-       Reverse the definitions in Schedule 6 (including the certificate/practical completion and step-in maintenance contribution references).

-       Swap S6 Parts 2 and 3 and reverse the SANG references therein.

-       Mechanism inserted to secure the 2ha of temporary grassland is planted across the old SANG A (what will be SANG B).

-       Secure delivery of local equipped area for play (LEAP) by July 2025.

-       Amend SANG delivery trigger to prior to the occupation of the 49th dwelling.

 

Or

 

B)   Refuse permission if the legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) is not completed by (6 months from the date of the committee) or such time as agreed by the Head of Planning.