Agenda item

71251: Land Off Nadder Lane, South Molton Devon

Erection of 187 dwellings together with associated infrastructure, public open space and landscaping (Amended plans) (report attached).

 

Minutes:

 

The Committee considered a report by the Lead Planning Officer (South) (circulated previously).

 

The Lead Planning Officer (Majors) addressed the Committee and advised that:

 

·         The location of the site, which was for 187 dwellings, was to the western side of South Molton. It was an infill site between two existing sites to the North and South.

·         The site was on 7.93 hectares of agricultural land.

·         Following discussions with the Ecologist it was agreed that the two existing Linhays on the site (which provided roosting for owls) would be offset with the provision of an owl roost in the existing trees.

·         The new dwellings would be at distances of between 20m and 33m from the existing dwellings along West Park.

·         The dwellings were 1.5 storeys, and 2 storeys high, and were of a range of styles and roof types. Drawings of the street view showing the variety of dwelling styles was presented to the Committee.

·         Each dwelling would have access to car parking and an enclosed rear garden.

·         20% affordables were proposed. This included 75% social rent housing, and 25% shared ownership properties.

·         The proposals provided 33 dwellings per hectare, which was considered a reasonable density of development.

 

Marc Cornelius (South Molton Town Council) addressed the Committee.

 

The Corporate and Community Services Officer read a statement from Stan Colman (objector) to the Committee.

 

David Johnson, Herbert Cromack and David Winter (Supporters) addressed the Committee.

 

The Corporate and Community Services Officer read statements from Lyn Winter and Derry Hodgson (objectors) to the Committee.

 

Jamie Grant of Wainhomes, (applicant), addressed the Committee.

 

Councillors Henderson and Worden addressed the Committee as Ward Members.

 

In response to the representations made, the Lead Planning Officer (Majors) advised:

 

  • A Viability assessment had been independently assessed and the best proposal had been presented.
  • South West Water had raised no objections.
  • DCC Highways had raised no objections or concerns.
  • The officers had secured design changes but there was no policy reason or amenity reason to require single storey dwellings.
  • All representations were available on the Council’s website.
  • There had been two rounds of public consultation and site notices had been placed on site by the Lead Planning Officer (Majors).
  • The development as a whole was considered acceptable.

 

In response to questions from the Committee, the Lead Planning Officer (Majors) advised:

 

·         A refuse plan was included in the application.

·         There would be visual clues within the road design throughout the site to clarify that it was a residential area, rather than a fast track through the site.

·         Although the site was car-lead (as many residents would require spaces for vehicles) there would be strong pedestrian and cycle tracks throughout.

·         The design and access statement was in keeping with the traditional style of      South Molton, eg, grey slate-coloured roofs.

·         The amended layout showed the green routes through the site.

·         There was no requirement for the scheme to be re-examined by the design panel.

·         When previously assessed, the Linhays were not considered to be of a quality to deem them suitable for protection/listing. The assessment was carried out over 15 years ago.

·         The site was allocated for development within the Joint Local Development Plan.

·         The responsibility for the Orchard would be that of the management company.

 

In response to a question about viability of sites, and the provision of affordable housing, the Service Manager (Development Management) confirmed that viability would be scrutinised further as part of the review process of the Joint Local Development Plan. She confirmed that the Authority was tied by legislation.

 

RESOLVED (12 for, 0 against, 1 abstained) that the application be APPROVED as recommended subject to the following Viability Assessment AVA2 Section 106 Option 1 being agreed with the amendment as follows;

Option 1: 71% of Financial Contributions, with the Waste Management and Recycling contribution being £0, and the proposed contribution of £4,829 being added to the Medical Centre contribution, which would now total £60,749.

 

Supporting documents: