Agenda and minutes

Councillor Cooke.

Councillors Cooke and Collins.

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of site visits.

Minutes of the meeting held on 20^th August 2020

RESOLVED THAT

The minutes of the meeting held on 20^th August 2020 were approved and signed as a correct record.

Planning Application Documents

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report.

There were 2 public speakers in support of the application- Peter Frampton (on behalf of the applicant) and Alistair Baxter (Ecologist).

There were 3 public speakers in objection: Dave Edwards (Friends of Charlton Kings), Sam Watson (Ecologist) and Councillor Matt Babbage (as Ward Councillor).

The matter then went to Member questions, the responses from Officers are as follows:

-       There are clauses within the section 106 agreement that require a full biodiversity management plan to be submitted..  Funding is outlined in the same section 106 agreement, which will require short and long term plans.

-       With regards to concerns raised by the Badger Association and indemnity insurance to cover costs of appropriate mitigation works, the ecological adviser had advised that this would not be necessary. The Natural England licensing regime would come into play if badgers were to be relocated. Barriers to protect properties would have to put in place the same time as the construction of the artificial badger sett.

-       The conditions required final agreement on boundary matters, however there was a precedent for this and it was important to establish if there were concerns about widespread harm or heritage aspects.

-       The turning circle had been removed from the plan as there will now be places to turn closer to the site.

-       With regard to the requirement for affordable housing, there was no obligation for the council to reconsider its agreements within 5 years. The site is tied into the current Section 106 agreement.

-       There are no details regarding drainage at this point, however they are covered under the Comprehensive Conditions.

-       The biodiversity officer confirmed that there is a net biodiversity gain across the whole site and the landscape strategy makes clear where open areas and grass spaces will be.

-       There is key consideration to safe pedestrian, cycle and emergency vehicle access in icy and wet weather.

-       With regards to the veteran trees and preventing water damage, this has been included in the conditions. The trees officer confirmed that it would be wise to put in deep foundations to reduce negative effects, the trees are relatively far from the development but it was important to err on the side of caution.

-       Any person who purchased the site would be subject to the same restrictions and conditions, however a third party buyer could in theory reduce the amount of social housing, but the authority would have the ability to approve or refuse this. 

-       It was pointed out that Members were not establishing a rigid principle of 43 homes but considering all aspects and weighing up the benefits of the properties versus any harm caused.

-       It was acknowledged that highways access was not easy, but this was not necessarily a problem since this would mean vehicles would approach with caution. Highways had considered the access as suitable for the proposed development.

-       With regard to the 42% affordable housing issue it was confirmed that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Planning Application Documents

The Head of Planning presented the application.

In response to Member questions the Head of Planning responded that annual lease agreements were provided and not enshrined for any permanent period of time.

In the short debate Members welcomed the improvements already made to the existing site, during a time of economic uncertainty.

There were no further points raised and the matter went to the Legal Officer to take the vote.

Vote on officer recommendation to permit :

For: 9

Against: 0

Abstain: 0

PERMIT

Planning Application Documents

The Planning Officer presented the application.

There was one public speaker (the applicant) spoke in support of the application. He explained to Members why he required the additional space.  He added that he had consulted with an engineer about how he could increase the space in the house with only minimum impact on neighbours.

There were no Member questions. Members supported the application.

Vote on officer recommendation to permit :

For: 9

Against: 0

Abstain: 0

PERMIT

Details of the current appeals that have been lodged.

There were none

There were none and the next scheduled meeting is 15^th October.