Agenda item

To determine the application

David Rowen presented the report to members and drew their attention to the update report.

Members received a presentation in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Andrew Hodgson, the agent. Mr Hodgson stated that he is delighted that the officer has recommended the application for approval, and referred to the objection raised by March Town Council, which they have tried to address with them outside the meeting, one of which was overdevelopment but this is an allocated site for viable housing and the proposal has been planned at a scale which he feels is appropriate and will be subject to a review at the detailed stage of the reserved matters part of the application should permission be granted. He stated that March Town Council has also raised the issue of access, however, that has already been approved through the scheme for nine units on the adjacent site which the Highway Authority has already signed off.

Mr Hodgson explained that the site already has an established boundary and, in his opinion, it made sense to plan the proposal in a way that has already been developed and for it not to be part of the wider Broad Concept Plan (BCP) area, but for it to have its own access point and there will be two pedestrian and cycle links only through to the other Persimmon site. He added that those links will flow through to the proposed new school when it is built, and a decision was made not to have any vehicular access as it would have caused a rat run through to the Persimmon estate.

Mr Hodgson stated that with regards to the 25% affordable housing allocation, the applicants Cannon Kirk, are also responsible for the 9 units on the adjacent site and cumulatively the 25% makes up the total amount of affordable units to be provided across both sites.

Members asked Mr Hodgson the following questions:

·       Councillor Mrs French expressed the opinion that she is delighted to see that the applicant is offering 25% of affordable housing, given the fact that they did only have to offer 20% and she congratulated the applicant.

·       Councillor Gerstner asked whether the affordable housing mix will be distributed evenly across the site? Mr Hodgson explained that the reserved matters layout will be very similar to that which is shown on the indicative site plan, which shows two areas for the affordable housing.

Members asked officers the following questions:

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that, in her opinion, she has never seen a condition 21 which has been applied to this proposal, which refers to removing permitted development rights on an outline planning application. She stated that she does not agree with the condition as it is unfair and precludes residents from adding a greenhouse or shed and would mean that there would be the need for a resident to have to apply for planning permission and she feels it is an unreasonable condition. Councillor Mrs French asked for an explanation as to why such a condition has been imposed? David Rowen stated that the condition would be required due to the fact that within his presentation he had indicated that some of the dwellings will be quite close together, however, as it is an outline application that condition has been reconsidered and within the update report it has been decided that at this stage that condition can be removed, however, it may be a matter which will need to be reconsidered as part of the reserved matters application.

·       Councillor Mrs French asked for an explanation with regards to condition 15? David Rowen explained that condition 15 had been requested by the Highway Authority to prevent residential access being blocked off by gates to the detriment of highway safety and it is a condition which is used for large scale developments on a regular basis and will have been included on most of the large scale residential schemes which have been brought before the committee over the past few years. He added, therefore, that the condition is necessary albeit with a slight amendment to the wording which was detailed in the update report.

·       Councillor Booth made reference to the point raised by Councillor Mrs French with regard to the requirement of affordable housing only being 20%, but contained within the March Neighbourhood Plan it states 25% and he asked for clarity? David Rowen stated that the 2014 adopted Local Plan did have a 25% target within it and the Neighbourhood Plan was introduced and was consistent with that. He added that as part of the emerging Local Plan, a viability report was undertaken which concluded that south of the A47, 20% affordable housing delivery was viable which has been consistently treated as a material planning consideration over the last 18 months. He stated that had this proposal come forward with only 20% being offered then officers would be in a position where that would have also been agreeable.

·       Councillor Gerstner asked where the nearest play area is situated? David Rowen stated that currently there is a play area further back along The Avenue, however, the proposal does fall within the wider development of the site and as part of the wider development of the strategic allocation and within that there will be play areas included.

·       Councillor Purser stated that there is a footpath from Knights End directly to The Avenue where there is a play area.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·       Councillor Benney stated that he agrees with the officer’s recommendation, and he also welcomes the 25% of affordable housing contributions which are in line with the emerging Local Plan. He added that there are no detrimental reasons to refuse this outline application and he will be supporting it.

·       Councillor Booth stated that he agrees with Councillor Benney and added that the reason the application has come before the committee is due to the comments made by March Town Council, one of which is with regards to highways, however, there is a highways report which goes against the point raised by the Town Council. He added that other point that they have raised is concern with over development, but the proposal is part of the BCP. Councillor Booth stated that he will support the application.

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that the new members of March Town Council made their decision without realising that the application was part of the BCP allocation.

·       Councillor Purser stated that having lived in this area, there is a bungalow on the corner and his concern was the entrance being on the right-hand side of the bungalow but it has been moved round which allays his concern. He noted that there were terms put to the applicant originally and he has agreed to these in writing, which he feels is positive for this application.

·       Councillor Gerstner stated that he notes that the affordable housing allocation is for 9 x 2-bed units, and he asked whether that is usual as, in his opinion, he feels it is restrictive for families to occupy. David Rowen stated that as the current application is only outline there is no detail on house types or layout and guidance from the housing team will be sought with regards to the appropriate mix that is required. He added that given the Council’s success rate in delivering affordable units, he welcomes the 9 proposed units rather than nothing at all.

Proposed by Councillor Purser, seconded by Councillor Mrs French and agreed that the application be APPROVED as per the officer’s recommendation.

(Councillors Mrs French and Purser registered, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that they are members of March Town Council but take no part in planning)