To consider a 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 explaining that the issues raised related to the scheme of development approved under reference: 11/01927/MFUL for erection of 36 dwellings with associated access road, car parking, landscaping and demolition of existing outbuildings adjacent to Howden Court. The matter for members consideration at the meeting related to the delivery of a link between the development area and Palmerston Park which was shown on the approved plans and referred to in the Section 106 agreement but had not yet been built out.
As background it was confirmed that planning permission had been granted for the scheme of development in June 2012, with the committee having first considered the application scheme at an earlier meeting in March 2012. The committee resolved to grant planning permission subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement to cover various matters and to a number of conditions to control/regulate the delivery of the approved scheme. Following the completion of the legal matters to agree the terms of the Section 106 agreement on the 24th October 2012 the planning permission decision notice certificate was issued on the 9th November 2012. He drew attention to the proposed link between the new estate and Palmerston Park which had formed part of the S106 agreement. Although the section of the link outside the application site had been completed, the formation of the pathway from the site boundary adjacent to Palmerston Park up to the estate road serving the new development had not been completed.
He identified by way of presentation the area for the proposed footpath, the change in ground level, the route down the hill to Howden Court and photographs from various aspects of the site. He highlighted the requirements Policy AL/TIV/10 and informed the meeting that all parties had signed the Section 106 Agreement. The report highlighted the fact that the new residents of the estate were largely not in favour of the footpath link being delivered as there were concerns that it would remain unadopted, with no lighting that could lead to safety and security issues, they also felt quite strongly that because of the change in levels that the path was not likely be used with residents stating that a route down to the Exeter Road and along the footway into Tiverton would be the preferable route if there were walking into town. The report also highlighted the safety and security concerns expressed by the occupiers of the property referred to as Howden Court.
He provided answers to question posed in public question time stating that all parties had agreed to the route and that the S106 agreement had been signed. There was now a different Police Architectural Liaison Officer in post, the concerns raised with regard to safety and security were valid however a safe and secure route could be delivered. Whilst the main access route into the Estate was to be adopted, it was never intended that the link out to Palmerston Park would be. The estate road was not adopted. With regard to the slope and gradient of the footpath, it would not suit all, the maintenance issues would have to be addressed by the developer of the Management committee. If it was not to be adopted there was a need for it to be managed in hours of darkness, this had been known at the time of approval.
Consideration was given to:
· At what point had the proposed cycle route dropped off the S106 agreement
· Maintenance of the area
· If the footpath had been put in place prior to development as stated in the conditions, the issue would not now need addressing
· The need for conditions to be enforced
· Safety issues with regard to the footpath on Exeter Road
· Whether the footpath was inappropriate and dangerous
· Who now owned the land in discussion
· Whether an alternative outcome could be discussed with the developer.
RESOLVED that the decision on whether the proposed link between the site and Palmerston Park as approved under LPA ref: 11/01927/MFUL be deferred to allow officers to have further discussions with Heritage Homes and any other relevant land owning interests as to what could be achieved in terms of an off-site financial contribution in lieu of providing the link and on a quid pro quo basis.
(Proposed by Cllr R L Stanley and seconded by Cllr B A Moore)
Notes-:
(i) Cllrs Mrs H Bainbridge, Mrs C Collis, Mrs F J Colthorpe, R J Dolley, P J Heal, B A Moore, R F Radford, J D Squire and R L Stanley made declarations in accordance with the Protocol of Good Practice for Councillors in dealing with Planning matters as they had all received correspondence regarding this application;
(ii) Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as some of the objectors were known to him;
(iii) Cllr R J Dolley declared a personal interest as Ward Member and he had been contacted by objectors and others with regard to the site;
(iv) Mr Reetz spoke on behalf of the objectors;
(v) Cllr Harrower (Tiverton Town Council) spoke;
(vi) The following late information was reported: Page 98: Since the report was written 7 letters from local residents on the new estate have been received confirming that they do not wish for the link to be put in place, and 3 representations from local residents confirming that the Council should ensure that the link is provided as it formed part of the original planning permission;
(vii) *Report previously circulated copy attached to minutes.
Supporting documents: