Issue - meetings

To consider application UTT/21/1495/FUL.

The Planning Officer presented an application seeking the erection of 44 residential units and 3 commercial units (flexible space); inclusion of 3 additional plots for self-build homes; together with associated access, car parking and landscaping.

The application was recommended for approval with conditions with S106.

The meeting adjourned at 1:48pm for a comfort break and reconvened at 1:55pm.

The Council’s Solicitor stated that any previous decisions made by the Planning Committee were of no relevance to the decision to be made in this instance. She said that the matter had previously been deferred andshe asked that Members should confirm their open-mindedness in the decision-making process.

Members discussed:

• The fact that only the Environment Agency can take the adequacy of the sewerage system into consideration with regard to planning matters.
• Serious health concerns needed to be considered in regard to the sewerage system.
• The clustering of the affordable housing in one area of the proposed development. This cluster had been deemed acceptable by the Housing Team.
• Commercial units offering local employment opportunities, which could reduce travel to work.
• Disproportionate size of development and overdevelopment in comparison to the size of the village.
• The need for developments to match the area they are adjoining to prevent loss of character in the area.
• The potential loss of the river valley view.
• The current lack of amenities in the village.
• The urban form of design, particularly the contemporary brick work that failed to echo the surrounding area.
• The proposal for 40% affordable housing was favourably received.
• Whether the harm outweighs the benefit of the proposed development in respect of the tilted balance arguments.
• The actual viability of the commercial units.
• Traffic and access issues.

The Council’s Solicitor reminded members that in the light of the fact the application had been deferred to obtain further information, that they should be mindful of the appearance of pre-determination and that they should consider the application upon the basis of the materials put forward at this meeting.

The Development Manager reminded members of the lack of five year land supply.

The Chair reminded members that statutory consultees had not objected to this application.

The Development Manager confirmed that he would endeavour to work with the developer to put pressure on Anglian Water to resolve the sewerage issues at this site.

Councillor Fairhurst proposed that the application be refused on the grounds of S7 and this was seconded by Councillor Sutton.

The motion was lost.

Councillor Lemon proposed that the application be approved subject to the conditions with S106, to also include an informative highlighting the sewerage concerns and to include the hours of operation and parking on site within condition 13. Councillor LeCount seconded the proposal.

RESOLVED to approve the application, subject to the conditions with S106 and an informative as detailed above.

O Armes, Councillor M Foley, Councillor L Pepper (as a resident), K Rodwell, Councillor S Sidgwick, J Sihota, G Wassell and E Wells spoke against the application.

N Bennett (Agent) spoke in support of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6