Agenda and minutes

The proposal before Members was for the erection of a new dwelling with private amenity and off street car parking.

Members noted that the application had been called-in by Councillor John Crowder.

Councillor Crowder believed the development was in keeping and provided identical accommodation as a few houses to the right of the proposed development. He considered the proposed parking and amenity spaces to be sufficient in this instance and would personally like to see more affordable housing built in this way.

With its agreement Councillor John Crowder addressed the Committee Councillor Crowder re-iterated his earlier comments and also commented that the property would have an acceptable level of amenity space at the side of the property rather than at the rear.

During the debate Members sought and received clarification on the reasons for the previous refusal of a similar application.

Following a motion to grant planning permission which was lost by 4 votes to 6 it was RESOLVED that planning permission be refused as per the reasons contained within the report.

Councillors Crowder, Smith, Hawthorn, Nunn, Martin and Williamson voted for the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.

Councillors Misir, Wallace, White and Whitney voted against the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.

The report before Members detailed an application for the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of forty flats in two blocks with parking and landscaping.

The application was previously considered by the Committee in May 2015. The Committee resolved to grant planning permission for the development, contrary to officer’s recommendation, subject to satisfactory negotiation with the applicant to achieve satisfactory entrance and egress visibility, a section 106 contribution for infrastructure impact and a review mechanism for affordable housing.

Although satisfactory agreement was reached in regard to key matters to enable negotiations on the S106 to progress, the applicant had not pursued the completion of the S106 legal agreement and therefore planning permission had not yet been granted. The application site was subsequently sold and the new owner had confirmed that they wished to progress the S106 legal agreement. However, in view of the time that had elapsed since the original resolution to approve in May 2015, and planning policy changes that had taken place in the intervening period, Staff considered that the application was required to be brought back before the Committee for re-determination.

During the debate Members again questioned the access and egress arrangements but as before felt that these would be addressed by the applicant.

Members also sought clarification to see if the new applicant had entered into negotiations with registered social landlords to provide an element of affordable housing within the development.

It was RESOLVED that consideration of the item be deferred to allow the applicant to investigate the possibility of entering into an agreement with a registered social landlord.

The vote for the resolution was carried by 8 votes to 1 with 1 abstention.

Councillor Whitney voted against the resolution to defer consideration of the application.

Councillor Martin abstained from voting.