Report of the Head of Planning and Regeneration regarding this application.
Minutes:
The Committee had before it a report * of the Head of Planning and Regeneration regarding the above application. The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation identifying the location plan, the master-plan area, the location of the left in and left out junction (LILO) and the full junction on the A361 (which had the benefit of planning permission), the indicative layout, the proposed buffer zone adjacent to Mayfair, the area of development to the south of West Manley Lane. It was confirmed that the application sought planning permission for a form and quantum of development which was in accordance with the adopted Masterplan, with all matters relating except means of access to be considered at the reserved matters stage. The APO then went onto to confirm the proposed access arrangements, and highlighted a number of conditions in the report and the terms of the S016 agreement that would control and manage the delivery of the access arrangement, including Condition 13 which required passing places to West Manley Lane to be incorporated into the development scheme design.
He addressed the questions presented earlier in the meeting: Natural England had previously objected to the application, however further information had been submitted and they had now withdrawn their objection subject to the provisions of Condition 15. Other conditions dealt with flooding issues and the single track lane. With regard to development on West Manley Lane, that was for Members to decide but it was confirmed that the application proposals was in accordance with the adopted masterplan.
With regard to Dr Bell’s questions, the noise survey had been completed and Devon County Council had received it although it had not been reviewed. With regard to air quality issues, the application was supported by Environmental Impact Assessment, which included a review of air quality issues. This information had been considered by officers, including Environmental Health Officers and that the updated Condition 2 was relevant to this issue. The issue of employing a district heating system was referenced in the the Allocations and Infrastructure Development Plan Document, however the size and amount of development proposed as part of the masterplan area is unlikely to generate sufficient demand for a district heating scheme.
Discussion took place regarding the traffic calming on Blundells Road with Mr Sorenson (Devon County Council – Highways Authority) informing the Committee that the LILO would not be constructed before the summer of 2016 as further design work was necessary. The traffic calming in Blundells Road could only take place during the school summer holidays because of the impact on Blundells School, the summer of 2015 was too early for any development and therefore there would be no development on the Eastern Urban Extension before the summer of 2016, this gave the Highway Authority an opportunity to look at the design of the scheme with regard to materials and appearance.
Further discussion took place the trigger points set out in the Masterplan, a low emissions strategy outlined in the update sheet as an addition to Condition 2; development on West Manley Lane and concerns about the threat to the SSSI at Tidcombe Fen
At this point the lateness of the hour was realised and it was therefore:
RESOLVED that the application be deferred to allow for further consideration to take place at the meeting of the Committee on 1 April 2015.
(Proposed by Cllr R L Stanley and seconded by Cllr M D Binks)
Notes:
Cllrs Mrs H Bainbridge, Mrs F J Colthorpe, A V G Griffiths, D J Knowles, R L Stanley and K D Wilson declared personal interests as local residents were known to them;
Cllr Mrs M E Squires declared a personal interest as a grandchild went to Blundells School;
Cllrs Mrs H Bainbridge, M D Binks, Mrs D L Brandon, Mrs F J Colthorpe, A V G Griffiths, P J Heal, Mrs L J Holloway, D J Knowles, E G Luxton, R F Radford, J D Squire, Mrs M E Squires, R L Stanley, K D Wilson and P F Williams made declarations in accordance with the Protocol of Good practice for Councillor dealing in planning matters as they had received correspondence regarding this application;
Mr Jones spoke on behalf of Sir Ian Amory (applicant);
The Chairman read a message from Cllr N V Davey (Ward Member);
Cllr D J Knowles spoke as one of the Ward Member’s;
Cllrs Mrs F J Colthorpe and Mrs M E Squires requested that their vote against the decision to defer be recorded;
Mr Sorenson and Mr Black (Devon County Council – Highways Authority) spoke;
The following late information was reported: Page 134 / 135:
Add condition and reason 18 as follows:
Noise from operations conducted at any of the employment premises on the application site shall not at any time exceed a decibel level of LAeq (1hour) 55 dB as measured on any boundary of the site with adjoining residential properties, between the hours of 0700 and 1900 on Mondays to Fridays and 0700 and 1300 on Saturdays, and LAeq (15min) 45 dB(A) during any other time including Bank Holidays.
Reason: To ensure that the proposed development does not prejudice the amenity of residents in the locality by reason of noise.
Page 131: amend condition 2 as follows:
2. Prior to the submission of a reserved matters application the following supporting information shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
i) Illustrated urban design and architectural principles, including block types and principles, parking, boundaries, public realm codes for character areas and architectural guidelines,
ii) A strategy for the management and maintenance of all green infrastructure across the application site and the other land owned by the applicant that falls with the boundaries of the adopted Masterplan Area. The Strategy document shall set out the management, maintenance, access and use arrangements for each land parcel and a delivery plan identifying a trigger date for the completion of each of the relevant land parcels.
iii) A low emissions strategy.
Reserved matters applications for the site shall incorporate the approved details.
111/128
A further response has been received from South West Water, and a verbal update will be provided on any further changes to the recommendation at the meeting in connection with sewerage infrastructure.
Page 96, Further comments from the Highway Authority regarding specific comments to address comments made by Blundells School:
Taking the points in order the designs of the junctions are such that they cater for the capacity , these may have changes to them through the reserve matter applications which will inform the design and by the street scene and frontage treatment sought by the planning Authority and the planning committee. The conditions imposed by the Highway Authority require full details to be approved in writing, therefore the DWGC698/21 does not prejudice our design for the traffic calming which has recently been consulted upon and the influence of the street design has been emphasised and will influence the scheme that comes forward.
Traffic modelling has been undertaken on the junctions and the Highway Authority are happy with the outcomes and the modelling has influenced the design of the roundabout and has allowed a reduction in size to a 28 ICD. It should also be noted that sufficient land is to be made available to increase this diameter should future development to the East come forward. Again the pallet of materials and indeed the type of roundabout will be influenced by the estates design through the reserved matter application. While a standard roundabout is shown a “Poynton style roundabout “ can be constructed subject to additional traffic calming necessary for this type of design to work. The initial safety audit for the design has been carried out by the highway Authority as part of the process of assessing the planning application. It’s further design and construction will be subject to stage 2,3, and 4 safety audits secured through the highway legal agreements necessary for the construction. Further construction design and material choices are all conditioned and subject to LPA approval.
Page 111 and 128:
With regards to the matters raised by local residents and South West Water (SWW) regarding sewerage infrastructure, the following clarification has been provided by SWW regarding how they plan for and ensure there is sufficient capacity to accommodate new development:
SWW do not automatically include an allocated site in our business planning process as there is no guarantee that anyone site will be promoted and built out. Once developer interest has been expressed and there is some certainty with regard to the commencement of development of a site a detailed evaluation process can be undertaken, and then utilising the Requisition process for network upgrades, (after a developer has certainty of timing), we can provide certainty to the developer and LPA that the extra flows can be accommodated. In order to make this work though we may need to have planning conditions suitable for the development of a site to be controlled until any necessary network upgrades can be provided.
Given that SWW have confirmed that they know that the extra flows from up to 650 houses across the masterplan area can be accommodated before they may need to undertake any further capacity work, and a resolution has been passed approving up to 330 houses under LPA ref: 13/01616/MOUT, the following conditions is recommended as condition 19 for consideration by the committee to redress this issue:
No more that 320 of the dwellings on the application site shall be occupied, until the completion of works to ensure sufficient capacity at the Tiverton Sewage Works to accommodate the foul water drainage from the development proposed, or it is confirmed in writing by the sewerage undertaker that sufficient capacity exists to accommodate the development.
Reason: To ensure there are adequate water company (public ) sewerage facilities to receive foul water flows from the development in order to safeguard the environment.
Page 91 replace clause xviii as it is drafted regarding the transfer of land for use as allotments to only be necessary if the local residents continue to be of the view that it would be a positive use for this area of green infrastructure. Whilst the applicant would be happy to facilitate the use he would not support any land transfers but would be willing to make the land available.
*Report previously circulated copy attached to signed minutes.
Supporting documents: