Meeting documents

Application proposal: Outline application for residential development (approximately 30 dwellings.) and access from Shiremoor Hill.

(Prior to consideration of this application, Councillor Paul Maxwell declared a personal interest as a relative lived in a property adjacent to the site.  He also noted that his previous comments on the application had been published on the Council’s website, however, he would now consider the application with an open mind). 

The Area Lead Planning Officer presented his report to members with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.  He advised that since writing his report, 3 further letters from members of the public had been received which reiterated previous concerns on the updated site access plans.  He noted that Condition 11 of approval should be deleted as there was no proposed service road and  Condition 14 should be amended to add in "and 43 metres to the south".  He further noted that the applicant had agreed the transfer of some open land to the north of the site to the Parish Council however, this was a separate legal agreement and would not be secured through the planning permission.

In response to questions from Members, the Senior Legal Executive and the Area Lead Planning Officer confirmed:-

·         The gifting of land to the Parish Council did not meet the criteria to be included as part of the Section 106 Agreement for the site and so it was a separate contractual agreement between the owner and the Parish Council. 

·         It was proposed that 35% of the properties would be social housing. 

The Committee were then addressed by Mr I Hall of Merriott Parish Council.  He said that they had looked carefully at the plans and were in favour of the development.  Other possible sites in the village were not available for development and since the nursery in the village had closed, the traffic was reduced.  There was a memorandum of understanding with the owners to control the future use of the gifted land.    

The Committee were then addressed by Mr J Bowman, Mr M Davies, Mr J P Hartley, Mrs P Hobbs, Mr T Hobbs, Mr G McPherson and Ms J Taylor who all spoke against the proposed development.   Their comments included:-

·         There was a strong statement for maintaining the land as open space for the benefit of the community.

·         Currently 60 houses were being built in the village on brownfield sites.

·         Although the development proposed 35% affordable houses it did not mean that they would be built.

·         The land transfer may never take place unless there was a legally binding agreement through the planning application.

·         Existing water run-off from the land would be exacerbated by housing.

·         A guarantee that the affordable housing element would be built should be put in place. 

The Agent for the applicant, Mrs C Knee, said the objectors comments had been addressed by the planning officers.  The development would make financial contributions to the school and local infrastructure and would include affordable housing.  She confirmed the applicant was agreeable to planning permission being held back until the transfer of the community land was completed. 

The Ward Member, Councillor Paul Maxwell, advised that the site was part of the medieval centre of the village and should be preserved.  There was no guarantee of the transferred land being for community benefit and allowing the development would mean a 10% increase in the number of houses in the village if added to the developments already under way. 

During the discussion, varying views were expressed.  Concern was expressed that the transfer of the community land may not happen as it could not be tied to the planning permission.  The Senior Legal Executive said the application should be determined on its merits and she cautioned against deferring the application to wait for the land transfer to be agreed. 

Following further discussion, it was proposed and seconded that the planning application 16/00865/OUT be deferred for further information on the viability of the site relating to the proposed 35% affordable housing.  On being put to the vote, this was carried 6 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.

RESOLVED: that planning permission 16/00865/OUT be deferred to a future meeting of the committee for further information on the viability of the site relating to the proposed 35% affordable housing

(Voting: 6 votes in favour, 1 against, 1 abstention)