Agenda item

To consider a report by the Head of Planning.

The Area Lead Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of 60 No. dwellings, form public open space, local equipped area of play and attenuation pond. (Reserved Matters application to determine appearance, layout, landscaping and scale; and to discharge Condition Nos. 15 - Landscape Environment Plan, 17 - Soft Landscaping, 18 - Footpath Link, 21 - Materials Palette, 22 - Public Art and 24 - Lighting and Signage; following grant of Outline Planning Permission No. 2/2017/1095/OUT).

The officer highlighted the proposed site layout and the layout specifics. The proposed development was a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bed houses and flats. There were no design constraints as the application was not in a conservation area. 

There was a holding objection from the lead local flood authority in place. Conditions had previously been imposed on the outline application that prior to commencement of development drainage matters had to be agreed.  With these in place already this matter had been adequately addressed.

The key planning matters were highlighted – neighbour amenity and matters of design and layout.

The Transport Development Liaison Manager highlighted that the road layout complied with a speed limit of 20mph.  Car parking was built in line with council guidance, the provision being all on-street.  The Applicant had stated that the road would remain private and would not be offered for adoption.

A number of written submissions supporting and objecting to the proposal and a statement by the applicant were read out at the meeting and are attached to these minutes.  One late representation was received raising concerns about boundary fencing adjacent to existing properties.

Local Member for Stalbridge – Cllr Graham Carr-Jones

As the portfolio holder for housing Cllr Carr-Jones was very pleased to have this 100% affordable homes development within his ward.  He made reference to local chatter about the homes not being available for local people and explained to members how the housing register worked. He was still slightly disappointed with the design site layout. However, he was not asking for the application to be refused but asked that if there was anything in planning that could be done to mitigate the layout.  He asked who would be responsible for the maintenance of the trees and lighting specifics.  The Areas Lead Planning Officer advised that with regards to lighting the applicant would have to assign a management company to undertake maintenance and due care in the roads. In respect of tree management, condition 17 was around soft landscaping, and that the developer would need to notify Dorset Council for the first 4/5 years so the tree officer could go and see that it was all acceptable.

Members comments and questions

Cllr Fry asked about the size of the 2 bed houses and if they fitted with national criteria.  The Area Lead Planning Officer advised that officers could not enforce the size as this was guidance. In terms of renewable energy to make them climate change complaint, the officer advised that the applicant was not proposing any solar renewable element at the present time.  It was sustainable by its location and would meet the building regulations.  Following a question about how high the hedging would grow, the officer advised that this was set out in the landscape management plan submitted. The residents would be entitled to cut what was on their property but the Management Company would be responsible for this.

Cllr Jones asked if members could ensure a minimum maintenance standard of the road if they are not adopted. The officer confirmed that this would be the responsibility of the Management Company.  The Transport Development Liaison Manager advised that there was no obligation on the Highways Agency to check on comment on the road.

Cllr Penfold asked about the improvements to the footpath and what this would that entail.  The officer advised that typically the surface and links to the footpath would be tarmacked but there was no further work planned to the existing footway.

Cllr Hall asked why there was not more permanent fencing instead of hedging in the application.  The officer advised that he had considered different types of fencing.  Following a further discussion about the native hedging, the officer advised that the Tree Officers and Landscape Officers had raised no objections on this matter.

Cllr Andrews preferred the fencing and hedging proposal.

Proposed: Carole Jones

Seconded: Les Fry

Decision

That the application be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the appendix to these minutes.