1105
The Committee considered an application for the approval of the reserved matters following outline approval (213530). The application was referred to the Committee at the request of Members of the Planning Committee from the 22 September 2022 meeting when it was resolved that outline planning permission for the development was granted.
The Committee had before it a report in which all the information was set out.
Prior to the presentation of the item the Chair read out the following statement:
“Following receipt of a request for a site visit from Cllr Davidson last week to view application 241583 on the grounds of road access and a potential zebra crossing I consulted with the planning department and relevant officers on whether this was something the Committee would be able to consider at the meeting tonight. After careful consideration I decided that a site visit would not be convened for the following reasons:
- The Access arrangements to the site including the request for a crossing is not a matter that is before the committee for determination at the meeting tonight and cannot be re-opened as this was established at the Outline permission stage.
- Further to this at the meeting of the Planning Committee on the 22 September 2022 the Committee discussed the role of crossings with Martin Mason from Essex County Council’s Highways department and it was made clear that a zebra crossing was not supported by the Highway Authority and that the proposals put before the Committee were acceptable.
For these reasons no site visit was convened.”
Nadine Calder, Principal Planning Officer presented the application to the Committee and assisted them in their deliberations. The Committee were shown the layout of the site and where the houses would be located as well as the Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) feature to the south of the site. The Case officer detailed that the different types of house design proposed, the road layout of the site, soft landscaping features and the affordable housing designs. The Committee heard that the design and layout of the site was acceptable and that the proposals for the drop off and pick up point for the school and the footpath improvements had been secured at the outline planning stage. The Case Officer concluded by detailing that the officer recommendation was for approval as detailed in the report.
Robert Eburne (Applicant) addressed the Committee pursuant to the provisions of Planning Committee Procedure Rule 8 in support of the application. The Committee heard that the site had been allocated in the Local Plan and that a comprehensive set of planning obligations had been added to the site. The speaker detailed that the outline permission had conditioned a road safety audit and delivery of parking for the school and confirmed that both of these were being progressed. The next stage would be to engage locally on community infrastructure payments and working with officers on areas including hard landscaping. The applicant concluded by detailing that EV charging points would be provided on site as well as solar panels and that there would not be any gas boilers on the high-quality site.
Members debated the proposal on issues including: that the site did benefit from an allocation within the Local Plan, that there was concern that the application was premature as the car parking situation and drop off point detailed in the outline permission had yet to be secured and that if this layout was approved it would mean that it could not be altered if the onsite provision for the school did not come forward. It was added that the site had 33% open space but that there was no room for the parking if the on-site provision fell through. Some Members discussed deferring the item to ensure that the parking could be achieved or that an alternative layout plan could be provided. Concern was raised by the Committee regarding the non-adoption of the roads on the internal roads on the site by the Highway Authority as well as regarding the lack of proposed lighting on the site which would leave people walking around with torches.
It was proposed that the application be deferred to seek confirmation regarding the parking situation with the school, that the application be reconsidered to make sure the roads be to an adoptable standard, and that street lighting be included on the site.
Further concern was raised by the Committee regarding the lack of Children’s play equipment on the site and why there was no crossing or streetlights on the application.
At the request of the Chair the Principal Planning Officer and Joint Head of Planning responded that the conditions associated with the drop off point and parking meant that there could not be occupation of the site prior to the car park being provided and would be a risk for the developer of not having the development occupied. It was confirmed that this had not been formally submitted yet but it would not hold up the determination of this application. The Committee heard that the lighting could be included in a landscape condition if it was not already covered by the outline permission and that there was a Children’s Play area within 400m. It was detailed that the SUDs feature was on the south of the site and further details would be submitted for approval.
It was detailed that the footpath on the western side would link up and that pedestrians would have to cross the road at that point and confirmed that it did not meet the criteria for a zebra crossing and none of the infrastructure was directly linked to the Public Right of Way. The Committee heard that the adoption of roads in estates was a discretionary matter for the applicant and the Highway Authority and detailed that in this instance the applicant had chosen to not make them adoptable and it could not be insisted upon by the Committee to change this. It was confirmed that this cost would ultimately fall to the owners of the properties and any such other costs as lighting would also be included in this.
The Chair allowed the applicant to respond who detailed that lighting was already detailed in condition 6 of the outline application, that there would be a small precept for owners to pay however the developer primed this so that it would only mean a small amount to residents, and that they had to deliver the school parking otherwise the built dwellings could not be occupied.
The applicant detailed that they had with them plans that had yet to be submitted confirming that the parking issue was being resolved. The Chair adjourned the meeting for five minutes so that Officers and Members could look over the plans for the school parking.
Members debated the proposal on issues including that the plans had not been agreed by Essex County Council. The Case Officer advised Members that the School had recently become an academy and did not need County Council approval.
The previous proposal of Deferral was amended to request that the item is deferred until the matter was resolved and then authority could be given to approve the application which was seconded.
The Democratic Services Officer advised Members that the current motion upon the table was not valid as the application could not be deferred and approved at the same time and suggested that the resolution Councillors may wish to consider Delegating Authority to the Joint Head of Planning to approve the reserved matters application as detailed in the Committee report subject to the receipt of confirmation that parking in the curtilage of the school is agreed and deliverable in accordance with condition 29 of the outline planning permission.
The proposer and seconder amended their proposal following advice as follows:
That authority is delegated to the Joint Head of Planning to approve the reserved matters application subject to receipt of confirmation that parking in the curtilage of the school is agreed and deliverable in accordance with condition 29 of the outline planning permission.
The Committee debated the role of the management companies with some members acknowledging that the buyer would be aware of this when purchasing the property. At the request of the Chair the Joint Head of planning detailed that it was not possible to compel the developers to require the roads to be adopted or to an adoptable standard.
RESOLVED (UNANIMOUS) That authority is delegated to the Joint Head of Planning to approve the reserved matters application subject to receipt of confirmation that parking in the curtilage of the school is agreed and deliverable in accordance with condition 29 of the outline planning permission.