Skip to content
Agenda item
 

Agenda item

71660: Outline application for up to 59 residential units and associated infrastructure, some matters reserved (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) (additional information) at Land at Chivenor Cross, Chivenor, Braunton EX31 4BN

Report by Senior Planning Officer (North) (attached).

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report by the Senior Planning Officer (North) (circulated previously).

 

The Senior Planning Officer (North) addressed the Committee and advised of the following:

 

·       A Housing Needs Survey was not required although he confirmed that there was a need for affordable properties in the area.  The updated figures received from the Housing Enabling Officer following the publication of the report were that the following numbers of households required housing in the surrounding area (higher than previously reported in some areas);

o   HeantonPunchardon 48,

o   Braunton 116,

o   Ashford 5,

o   Marwood 5.

·       NDC and Torridge District Council (TDC) were jointly unable to demonstrate a five year housing land supply and, having looked at the High Court judgements, as requested by Members, the recommendations as set out still stood.  The officers were confident that their own recommendation was correct.

·       A further six representations (one of which was in support) had been received. The issues within these had been considered to have been addressed within the report.

·       One of the conditions had been amended to include that a homeowner pack would be provided to all households regarding recreational impacts as a result of the development being located close to a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

·       This was an outline planning application and the sizes/mix of dwellings could be considered at the reserved matters stage.

·       The Environmental Health Officer had confirmed the application was deemed to have no unacceptable effect on the air quality in Braunton and this was set out within the report.

 

Stephen Crowther (Vice Chair, Heanton Punchardon Parish Council) addressed the Committee.

 

The Senior Corporate and Community Services Officer read a letter from the Chair of the Heanton Punchardon Residents’ Committee to the Committee.

 

Sue Prosper (Chair of Love Braunton) and Councillor Andrea Davis (Ward Member) addressed the Committee.

 

In response to questions from the Committee the Planning Policy Officer (MA) confirmed:

 

·       There was a joint requirement (with TDC) to provide 861 dwellings per annum. Although there had been a 17% uplift in supply Authorities had no control over the build rate of the properties once planning permission had been granted.  Therefore the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) took preference and a tilted balance was applied.

·       It was considered that the five year housing land supply could be demonstrated, however the Inspector felt that the Authority had 4.23 years (rather than five) and sided with the appellant.

·       There was a 20% buffer in addition to the 861 requirement which needed to be achieved.

·       In terms of the Housing Delivery Test the Authority was over-achieving.

 

The Committee Members confirmed that Neighbourhood Plans were in progress for Braunton, Georgeham and Heanton Punchardon.  These were at varying stages of completion. Braunton’s plan was currently under consultation and funding had been sought for the final works required.

 

The Planning Policy Officer (MA) advised that the Heanton Punchardon Neighbourhood Plan had not progressed enough to provide substantial weight with this application.

 

The Chair reconfirmed that the Environmental Health Officer’s report had covered the air quality at Braunton in their report. 

 

RESOLVED (9 for, 3 against, 1 abstained) that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons;

a)    The application was contrary to planning policies ST07 and ST09 contained in the Joint Local Plan;

b)    The current shortfall in the five year housing land supply did not outweigh the planning policies;

c)     The cumulative effect of the developments between Chivenor and Braunton on Braunton’s air quality and that the Council had adopted a supplementary planning document on Air Quality;

d)    The application did not demonstrate full compliance with National Design Guidance; and

e)    The proposals may be contrary to the two emerging Neighbourhood Plans.

 

 

Supporting documents: