Agenda item

Land At East Lodge, Longcliff Hill, Old Dalby

Applicant:      HSSP

Location:        Longcliff Hill, Old Dalby

Proposal:      Outline application for the development of seven dwellings (amended description from six to seven dwellings)

 

A Cllr raised a question regarding how Cllrs could declare an interest in this application if the applicant is unknown.

 

It was confirmed that HSSP Architects are both the agent and the applicant.

 

(a)       The Planning Officer (GBA) stated that: Just a couple of updates, the first relating to both reports for Old Dalby.

It has been observed that the wording in the report on how Old Dalby is one of the most sustainable in Melton is too definitive. Its position as performing relatively well in terms of its facilities was concluded in the settlement roles report of April 2015 to support the new local plan. He advised that the case discussion of Queensway on page 7 is now considered not relevant and should be ignored. 

 

In relation to the application itself it proposes an outline only with access application for 7 dwellings from a revised original submission of six. The proposal relates well to the village and therefore will provide additional homes in a location with good access to services.

 

In the absence of an adopted neighbourhood nor local plan advising otherwise, we are therefore considering the proposal in line with the NPPF which promotes development in the most sustainable locations which includes Old Dalby according to our most up-to-date research.

 

For this reason therefore an approval recommendation is given.

 

(b)       Cllr Bennett, on behalf of Broughton and Dalby Parish Council, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           The Parish Council are opposed to the application.

•           Proposes further housing which is not required.

•           Site is in open countryside.

•           The already approved applications in Old Dalby have filled the available capacity of the local primary school.

•           The nearest surgery at Long Clawson is already under pressure.

•           Poor transport links and these have also recently been downgraded, increasing the reliance on motor cars.

•           Melton local plan approved by Cllrs and submitted for examination. This would not be consistent with policies recently voted for by Cllrs.

•           Recent decisions in Waltham (outlined in the minutes of 19th October 2017) gave significant weight to the emerging local plan policies and to Walthams own neighbourhood plan.

•           Minimal housing requirements have been fully met already.

•           Not on land identified for development.

•           Outside proposed limits to development.

•           Two recent appeal decisions were both refused. The Planning Inspector confirmed that policy OS2 carried weight and also sighted sustainability concerns.

•           Cumulative effect of other approved applications on the limited resources available in Old Dalby.

 

A Cllr asked if Cllr Bennett knew who the landowners are.

 

Cllr Bennett responded that he had been told in confidence but could confirm that it was a limited company and not a resident of Old Dalby.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services sought confirmation that these questions were intended to assist with their consideration of Member interests only - the identity of an applicant were not a planning consideration.

 

A Cllr raised a query with regard to the Local Plan and the weight it had held with the Waltham applications.

 

(c)        James Botterill, agent on behalf of the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

•           Application is for 7 dwellings together with an improved access off Longcliff Hill.

•           The site runs along an existing private drive leading to East Lodge located to the north east.

•           Contained by the existing public foot path to the north, the existing private residential drive to the south and Longcliff Hill to the west.

•           It represents an odd gap between the existing residential dwellings along Longcliff Close and the recent planning consent obtained by Cllr Orson to the north.

•           This application would link the adjacent development back to the village and together will create a more coherent residential development.

•           Good mix of house types set in a sustainable location.

•           Received no technical objections from consultees.

•           The scheme offers to extend the existing public footpath along Longcliff Hill to the south up to the site entrance and improve public connections for both our site and Cllr Orsons.

•           Housing layout sympathetic to the surrounding context. Two much needed 3 bedroom units.

 

A Cllr asked for clarification regarding access rights along the private driveway.

 

Mr Botterill confirmed that the landowner has access rights along that driveway which will go to the residents of the new houses.

 

A Cllr noted that Ecology had referenced a mature hedge and had requested a revised layout and asked if the applicant would be willing to have that as part of conditions.

 

Mr James Botterill responded that they had made recent changes due to the comments received and have introduced a 2 metre wild life corridor to run alongside the northern boundary.

 

A Cllr noted that Cllr Orson had applied for the recently approved application as a private individual and not as a Cllr.

 

A Cllr asked for further clarification regarding the road and rights of access.

 

Mr Botterill responded that both landowners have been talking together and that it the reason why the applications have come in together. There is an agreement between them regarding access. The road will be widened to meet LCC highways recommendations and there will be consent to travel over it.

 

A Cllr asked would happen if one of the applications got approved and the other didn’t. Would access over the road still be allowed.

 

Mr Botterill stated that it would have to otherwise you wouldn’t be able to get to the development.

 

The Chair reminded Members that land ownership is not a planning matter.

 

The Planning Officer (GBA) noted that at the current time there can be limited weight attached to the local plan or neighbourhood plan. According to records the surgery are still taking patients which suggests there is capacity. With regards to the appeal decisions, Queensway and Nether Broughton, these are isolated schemes and were refused for their own reasons. Every application is judged on its own merits.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services advised Members that the local plan and neighbourhood plan, even though they are incomplete, are still material considerations. It is up to Members to decide how much weight they have taking in to consideration the level of advancement, the degree of contention and the compliance with the NPPF. Officers advice is that with regards to the local plan and the applicable neighbourhood plan the weight it limited. Members may conclude differently and in terms of the Waltham applications mentioned Members did conclude differently. In that case quite significant weight was given to the combined effects of the neighbourhood and local plans and they are cited in the reasons for refusal on the three applications that were refused that evening.

 

As Mr Bennett said, this is clearly contrary to the neighbourhood plan. However he was not so convinced that it is contrary to the emerging local plan because that makes provision for windfall development of unallocated sites in Policy SS3, in sustainable locations, which this is considered to be, where they fulfil an identified need and meet a series of criteria. Not all the same influences of Waltham so it is not a perfect comparison.

 

Cllrs raised concerns regarding the 5 years land supply and Old Dalby already taking more than its fair share of housing. Further concerns regarding the sustainability of the village and the number of bedrooms in the proposed dwellings as they are big houses and more affordable housing is required.

According to the local plan the housing allocation has already been fulfilled with permitted applications.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services commented that the apportionment for housing in Old Dalby has been met and exceeded by a small amount.

 

A Cllr asked how many affordable houses and bungalows have already been approved in Old Dalby and noted that small houses are rare anyway.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services responded all applications dealt with so far have been outline therefore non of them have a precise mix of house type. Each of them is a S106 either completed or in hand which requires affordable housing. There is one exception which is the site at Woodlands. They are all at 37% and Woodlands is slightly diminished at 20%. The new local plan policy for Old Dalby demands 25% and the average of the examples provided is higher.

 

A Cllr noted that they thought the windfall sites would relate to the housing need. We don’t need 4 and 5 bedroom houses, what we do need is a mix of bungalows and smaller houses. This is outline so not discussing the housing mix at present. Would there be any scope to include the housing mix in a condition.

 

The Chair noted that if a proposer and a seconder appear they can add that condition if they wanted to.

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services confirmed that the allocation for Old Dalby, in the emerging local plan is 28 and it has been exceeded. The sizes of house are illustrative so if Members considered to necessary to control a mix of houses by means of a condition it would be legitimate.

 

Cllr Glancy proposed approval of the application with a condition requiring the housing mix to more accurately reflect the needs and a minimum of 2 metres of wildlife corridor incorporated. If refused it, it would not stand up to an appeal.

 

Cllr Cumbers seconded the proposal and also raised concerns regarding the size of the illustrated dwellings.

 

The Planning Officer (GBA) provided clarification of the requested condition – A scheme to be provided to illustrate the housing needs of Old Dalby. The current needs assessment suggests that it is two 2 bedroom, three 3 bedroom and one 4+ bedroom dwellings (of 3.4% for a single bedroom, 33% for 2 beds, 48% for 3 beds and 14% for 4+ beds, i.e. application from the Housing needs study , august 2016)

 

The Head of Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services noted that we would expect a reserved matter application to reflect this.

 

A Cllr questioned if there was a need for a one bedroom dwelling as no provision had been mentioned for this.

 

The Planning Officer (GBA) noted that it would be difficult to do 3.4% of 7 dwellings as this is a small development anyway.

 

A Cllr asked for clarification that there is a need for bungalows and the Planning Officer (GBA) confirmed that there is.

 

A Cllr noted that for builders to erect one bedroom homes costs just as much as two bedroom homes.

 

A vote was taken. 8 Members voted for the application to be permitted and 3 Members voted against. Cllr Chandler and Cllr Holmes asked for their votes against permit to be recorded.

 

Determination: PERMITTED subject to the conditions as set out in the report and an additional condition requiring that at ‘reserved matters’ stage house types reflecting identified local needs are provided.

 

REASONS: While the provision of housing would contribute to the NPPF’s objectives of boosting housing supply, the Borough is considered to have an adequate housing land supply and. Therefore the weight attached to the provision of a small number of houses is limited.

 

There are a number of other positive benefits of the scheme which include surface water management in the form of a sustainable drainage along with developer contributions to mitigate impacts upon local services.

 

Old Dalby is considered to be a reasonably sustainable location for housing development. The site is well related to the village and previously approved housing schemes, which mitigates its impact upon the countryside and the setting of the village.

 

In conclusion it is considered that, on the balance of the issues, there are benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of housing supply.  The balancing issues – development of a green field site and impact upon setting of the village– are considered to be of limited harm. 

 

This is because, In this location, the site benefits from a range of services in the immediate vicinity and nearby which mitigate the extent to which travel is necessary and limits journey distance, the character of the site provides potential for sympathetic deign, careful landscaping, biodiversity and sustainable drainage opportunities.