Agenda item

Consideration was given to the above application.

(The Interim Planning & Place Shaping Manager read out statements on behalf of Councillor D Brickhill and B Silvester).

RESOLVED

That the Appeal be contested on the following grounds:-

1. The proposed residential development is unsustainable because it is located within the Open Countryside, where according to Policies NE.2 and RES.5 of the adopted Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan there is a presumption against new residential development. Such development would be harmful to its open character and appearance, which in the absence of a need for the development should be protected for its own sake. The Local Planning Authority can demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land supply in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework. Consequently, there are no material circumstances to indicate that permission should be granted contrary to the development plan.

2. The proposal would result in loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land and given that the Authority can demonstrate a housing land supply in excess of 5 years, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there is a need for the development, which could not be accommodated elsewhere. The use of the best and most versatile agricultural land is unsustainable and contrary to Policy NE.12 of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan 2011 and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. The proposal is located within the Green Gap and would result in erosion of the physical gaps between built up areas as well as adversely affecting the visual character of the landscape, and given that there are other alternatives sites, which could be used to meet the Council’s housing land supply requirements, the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy NE.4 of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan, the National Planning Policy Framework and the emerging Core Strategy.

4. The proposal would involve the removal of an “important” hedgerow as defined in the Hedgerow Regulations 1997. Policy NE5 of the local plan states that the Local Planning authority will protect, conserve and enhance the natural conservation resource where, inter alia, natural futures such as hedgerows are, wherever possible, integrated into landscaping schemes on development sites. In the absence of overriding reasons for allowing the development and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy NR3 of the adopted Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan 2011.

5. The proposed development would not represent economically and socially sustainable development as there is no identified local need for the care provision. There is already an over-supply of such care provision in the locality which exceeds the needs for the current and future generations. The development would therefore be considered contrary to NPPF paras 7, 17 and 50.

6. The applicant has failed to demonstrated a safe and satisfactory means of access to the site, contrary to the provisions of Policy  BE3 (Access) of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan 2011 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. The Transport Assessment submitted with the application under-estimates the likely traffic impact of the development, which in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority would have a severe residual impact on the local road network, contrary to paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

8. Due to its scale the proposed development would impact on a wide area and is considered to be so substantial, and significant, that granting permission could prejudice the emerging Local Plan by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development which are being addressed in the policy in the Plan. It is also located in an Area of Search for proposed Green Belt in the emerging Local Plan and would predetermining decisions in respect of that policy.  It is therefore contrary to advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework and The Planning System: General Principles.

If the Secretary of State was minded to allow the Appeal then it was agreed that a Section 106 Agreement should be entered into securing the following:-

·        Provision of minimum of 13,200sqm of shared recreational open space and 17,600sqm of shared children’s play space, which is a total of 30,800sqm.

·       Open space to include a 35 plot allotment site, an equipped children’s play area including 6 pieces of equipment for young, plus 6 pieces for older children,a  floodlit Multi Use Games Area, an outdoor gym facility, and an area of community woodland.

·       Private residents management company to maintain all on-site open space, including footpaths

·       30% of the total dwellings to be affordable housing.

·       The tenure split of the affordable dwellings to be 65% social or affordable rent and 35% intermediate tenure.

·       An affordable housing scheme to be submitted with the reserved matters application, with no commencement of development allowed unless the affordable housing scheme has been approved.

·       The affordable housing scheme to identify the location, type and tenure of the properties.

·       The affordable housing to be pepper-potted (in clusters is acceptable)

·       The affordable housing to be built in accordance with the Homes & Communities Agency Design & Quality Standards (2007) and meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3.

·       A requirement that social/affordable rented or shared ownership dwellings are transferred to a Registered Provider

·       Affordable dwellings to be delivered no later than occupation of 50% of the open market dwellings, unless the scheme is phased and there is a high degree of pepper-potting in which case the number of open market dwellings which can be occupied can increase to 80%. If the development is phased the section 106 agreement needs to secure a proportion of affordable homes on each phase.

·       A fully serviced site be retained large enough to accommodate a 2 Form Entry Primary School and build cost provided to construct a new 1 form entry primary school (Amount to be £1,713.714.00).

In order to give proper effect to the Board`s intentions and without changing the substance of the decision, authority is delegated to the  Interim Planning and Place Shaping Manager, in consultation with the Chairman of the Strategic Planning Board, to correct any technical slip or omission in the wording of the resolution, between approval of the minutes and issue of the decision notice.