Agenda item

Residential development including the erection of 29no dwellings with garages and parking, formation of vehicular access from Wimborne Road, sustainable drainage infrastructure, new open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.

The Lead Project Officer presented the application for residential development in Lytchett Matravers. The site was identified on a map of the area, with a wooded area noted along the northern boundary. It was explained that Policy H6 of the Local Plan allocated the site for development of approximately 30 dwellings.

 

The proposed masterplan was shown, indicating the delivery of 29 units. Photographs were provided, including views from various points around the site and views looking west towards Flowers Drove. A plan illustrating the topography of the site was also presented, along with a site layout showing the proposed mix of housing. Street scene drawings were displayed to demonstrate the design and types of dwellings proposed.

 

Members were advised that 23 objections had been received from members of the public. No objections had been raised by statutory consultees; however, objections had been received from the Parish Council and the Housing Officer in relation to the lack of affordable housing provision. It was clarified that concerns relating to inappropriate development in the Green Belt under Policy V2 were not applicable, as the policy had been amended and no part of the site fell within the Green Belt.

 

In respect of housing mix, the proposal was acknowledged to conflict with Policy H9, as it included a higher proportion of larger dwellings and fewer smaller units than required. Regarding affordable housing, it was reported that a policy-compliant scheme would normally deliver 11 affordable units on site, together with a financial contribution. However, the applicant had demonstrated that, due to increased construction costs and the cost of achieving nutrient neutrality in Poole Harbour, the scheme could not viably deliver affordable housing. The District Valuer Service had independently reviewed the viability assessment and identified some differences in approach but ultimately agreed that a fully policy-compliant scheme would not be viable. It was concluded that the maximum viable financial contribution the scheme could support was £369,642, and the applicant had agreed to this figure.

 

An image was provided showing the proposed vehicular access, which would connect to the existing pedestrian footway. In addition to the main vehicular access, a secondary pedestrian access was proposed. It was explained that off-site alterations to the junction of Wimborne Road, Wareham Road and Lime Kiln Road would be secured, along with an approved scheme to the south, to ensure delivery even if the other scheme did not proceed. A total of 58 allocated parking spaces were proposed, comprising a combination of driveways and parking courts, along with 18 garage spaces and six on-street visitor parking spaces. It was noted that there would also be capacity for informal on-street parking.

 

The scale, layout and character of the development were outlined, with all dwellings proposed at two storeys in height. A higher density of development was proposed at the entrance to the site, with lower density housing further into the site. An attenuation basin was proposed to the east of Flowers Drove. The dwellings would be predominantly constructed in brick, with some use of painted brick and flint.

 

A landscaping masterplan had been submitted and was supported by the Council’s Landscape Officers. Proposals included feature boundary planting and the removal of a section of hedgerow to facilitate access. It was noted that there were a large number of trees along the site boundaries, and that a Tree Preservation Order had been made in respect of one tree on the site in response to the application. The Tree Officer was satisfied that all trees could be adequately protected, subject to conditions. Boundary treatments would include a mix of hedging, fencing and brick walls at public-facing rear boundaries.

In relation to residential amenity, concerns regarding overlooking were acknowledged. A full assessment had been undertaken, which concluded that there would not be sufficient harm to justify refusal of the application. The closest separation distance between properties was noted to be 15.3 metres and the orientation of the dwellings would mean that views would not be direct.

 

Drainage arrangements were explained, with surface water proposed to discharge to a ditch to the north of the site via an attenuation pond. The Lead Local Flood Authority had reviewed the proposals and confirmed that they would not increase flood risk elsewhere. Wessex Water had also confirmed that there was capacity within the foul sewer network.

 

In terms of ecology and habitats, the proposal was confirmed to be biodiversity net gain compliant. The site lay within 5 kilometres of the Dorset Heathlands, and an appropriate assessment had been undertaken, demonstrating that mitigation could be achieved. This would include the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) and nutrient neutrality through the purchase of credits.

 

Officers concluded that, on balance, the proposal was acceptable. It was further noted that, due to the Council’s lack of a five-year housing land supply, the conflict relating to housing mix was not considered to carry sufficient weight to justify refusal of planning permission.

 

Public representation was received in support of the application from Brett Spiller, the agent for the application. He stated that there had been many challenges to the scheme, which had impacted its viability. However, the scheme was compliant with policy H6 and would provide 29 additional much needed homes in a sustainable location.

 

Officers provided the following responses to questions from members:

·       Policies within the Local Plan and nationally allow for viability to be reviewed and the applicant and District Valuer had come to the conclusion that the scheme could not support on site provision of affordable housing.

·       The application would be liable for the full level of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and Section 106 legal agreement to secure necessary financial contributions and provision of open space and SANG.

·       The road layout was constrained by the changes in levels across the site, meaning a circular route through the site was not possible.

·       It was not considered appropriate to join the top of the footpath to Flowers Drove as it would require the removal of a large portion of hedgerow and it was not considered necessary to make the development acceptable as there was an alternative safer route to access the SANG.

·       The chimneys of the dwellings were decorative and not functional.

·       Renewables such as solar panels and air-source heat pumps were not required for planning purposes, however building regulations would require the dwellings to be built to standard of energy efficiency.

·       It was considered that the scheme provided an appropriate drainage solution through the a proposed attenuation pond and connection to an existing ditch. 

·       CIL payments would be used to meet the demands resulting from the development.

·       It was not considered that there was sufficient demand to justify a controlled crossing.

·       A condition was included requiring the full details of the surface water management scheme to be submitted.

·       Should a change of speed limit of Flowers Drove be seen as necessary, the Parish Council could seek to reduce the speed limit in the future.

It was proposed by Cllr Sowry-House and seconded by Cllr Morgan, that the application be granted.

 

Decision:

 

That authority be delegated to the Corporate Director for Planning, the Service Manager for Development Management & Enforcement or the Development Management Area Manager East to:

 

A)    Grant, 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 secure the following:

• an Affordable Housing Contribution of £133,043.00 Index Linked index-linked using RPI from the date of this committee report, in lieu of on-site provision

• Financial contributions of £221,809.98 Index Linked index-linked using RPI from the date of this committee report, towards education provision.

• Financial contributions of £ 2,230 Index Linked index-linked using RPI from the date of this committee report, towards healthcare provision.

• Financial contributions of £12,470 Index Linked index-linked using RPI from the date of this committee report, towards public rights of way.

• Provision of on-site open space play facilities

• Provision and promotion of SANG. And the following conditions (and their reasons).  

 

And the conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.

 

B)    Refuse permission for the reasons set out in the appendix to these minutes if the agreement is not completed by 24 December 2026 (6 months from the date of committee) or such extended time as agreed by the Corporate Director for Planning, the Service Manager for Development Management & Enforcement or the Development Management Area Manager East.