Agenda item

That conditional planning permission be granted subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation to provide for:

(a)       Control the provision and occupation of 4 No. bungalows within the development which are proposed to be gifted to the Council to meet     affordable housing needs.

(b)       Ensure the payment of an educational contribution of £49,028 towards school places at Sychdyn Primary School and £129,283 towards improving facilities to increase capacity at Argoed Secondary School.

And subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment)

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application which had been the subject of a site visit and was deferred at the last meeting. The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.  Additional comments received since the preparation of the report were circulated at the meeting. 

            The officer gave an overview of the application and explained that the proposals were for the erection of 43 No. dwellings and associated works on land at Ffordd Eldon, Sychdyn, Mold.  The site was allocated for residential development in the Flintshire Unitary Development Plan by virtue of Policy HSG1 (38).  A Development Brief for the site had previously been produced and adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance in 2012.   Amended plans had been received in progression of the application on which further consultation was undertaken.   The officer outlined the reasons for recommending approval, subject to conditions and to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation.

                        Councillor Marion Bateman spoke against the application on the grounds that  it did not comply with its site-specific Development Brief (the Brief).  She said that the Brief had been advised because of the sensitive nature of the site due to the locally important Wats Dyke archaeological remains and the additional restrictions on the site, resulting in a requirement to build at an appropriate density.  She said that the Brief had been approved by Council in September 2012.  She referred to the need for compliance with the Brief which should be afforded considerable weight as a material planning consideration.  She said that the Brief attached to the Sychdyn site had weight behind it and that there were examples in the report where it was stated that the Brief was a guidance document and not prescriptive which was misleading. 

Councillor Bateman said that the proposed number of dwellings were affected by the constraints of the site.  The net development area was 1.3 hectares; a low density of 25 per hectare would produce 33 dwellings and an average density of 30 dwellings per hectare would produce 39 dwellings.  She said the Council did not consider it appropriate to exceed the levels given the circumstances of the site. The application was for 43 dwellings which was between 4 and 10 extra dwellings than in the Brief.   Referring to site description Councillor Bateman said a public right of way ran along the southern edge of the site which formed part of the Wats Dyke Heritage Trail.  She stated that bungalows primarily surrounded the site and that it may be appropriate to use this type of building design within the development at the southern side of the site where it interfaced with the existing village.  Councillor Bateman also referred to the proposals in paragraphs 7.19 and 7.20 of the report which she said were misleading and not compliant with the Brief. 

Councillor Bateman drew attention to paragraph 7.36 of the report and said that the Brief provided an indicative plan suggesting that the public open space could be provided centrally within the layout and objections had been received on the basis that the layout should reflect this.  She reiterated that she disagreed with the statement that the Brief was a guidance document only and not prescriptive policy, given its weight as a material planning consideration in line with advice from the Welsh Government. She urged Members to refuse the application on the grounds that it did not comply with the Brief.

Having earlier declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the application, Councillor Marion Bateman left the meeting prior to the matter being debated by the committee.

Dr. F. Hulbert spoke against the application and referred to the following reasons for recommending refusal: the valuation of the 4 No. gifted properties; inadequate and unsafe site access at Ffordd Eldon and excessive use of the unadopted road;  traffic congestion which threatened the safety of elderly residents and compromised the emergency services gaining access to the village at certain times of day; approval of the application would jeopardise the Council’s duty of care; Wat’s Dyke Way was in poor condition and work was required to improve the condition of Wat’s Dyke Way to facilitate the proposed development;  increased traffic congestion  particularly around the primary school and playground area; the impact on the capacity of the local primary school; and the lack of housing need in Sychdyn.   In summing up Dr. Hulbert said it was not acceptable to grant approval, subject to conditions, without a thorough site access, design, travel, and traffic management plan being   submitted as part of the application with a land contamination report. 

Councillor J Roberts, on behalf of Northop Community Council, referred to the importance of the Brief which was only commissioned in sensitive circumstances and the need to subscribe to it in full.  He commented on the unanimous opposition of Northop Community Council to the proposals and asked Members to support the wishes of the local community. 

Councillor Roberts spoke against the application on the following grounds; the density and number of dwellings proposed were in excess of the requirement in the proposed development; the reduction in affordable housing from 13 No. to 4 No. bungalows was unacceptable and was not in accordance with the 30% stated in the Brief; the lack of detail around management of public open space and the  archaeological buffer zone; the impact on the public right of way; and how the proposed management company was to be funded and operated.  He said these matters needed to be embodied in a construction management plan available for public inspection and determination.  Councillor Roberts also referred to the concerns raised around traffic on the development and referred to the impact on highway safety; the impact on the local primary school and elderly residents; the impact on the unmade section of Wat’s Dyke Way and the inadequacy of Ffordd Eldon as a site access point. 

Councillor Gareth Roberts moved the officer recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  He commented that he saw no reason for refusal and pointed out that the proposal included 4 No. gifted properties to the Council not affordable properties as previously referred to.  Councillor Roberts said that if the application was refused and the applicant went to appeal there may be significant cost to the Authority if the appeal was successful.

Councillor Derek Butler concurred that there was no reason to refuse the application and commented on the value of the site visit.

Councillor Chris Bithell said the site was within the Flintshire Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and the settlement boundary.  He commented that there was no objection to the  proposal from the Highway Development Control Manager, or drainage bodies, and that there were no specific problems with access to the site.   Referring to the matter of affordable homes he said there were 4 No. gifted properties to the Council to meet affordable housing needs and commented on the difficulty experienced by many individuals in the current financial austerity to save towards the cost of an ‘affordable’ home.  Councillor Bithell also referred to the safeguarding measures to be undertaken to facilitate the preservation of archaeological remains.  He acknowledged the local concerns which had been raised around the preservation of archaeological remains and the location of the play area but cautioned that if the application was refused and the applicant went to appeal Inspectors would seek evidence based facts which were not available in this instance.

Councillor Mike Peers supported approval of the application.  He spoke of the overarching purpose of the UDP and said that Sychdyn had not yet reached the target deadline. In acknowledging the concerns which had been raised by Northop Community Council and local residents he commented on the residential development which had taken place in other areas in Flintshire. Councillor Peers referred to the impact on housing need by the 13 No affordable houses which had been initially proposed in the original plan being replaced by 4 No. gifted bungalows to the Council.  He expressed concern that the proposal did not afford the same opportunity for local people to “get on the property ladder”. In response to his concerns officers explained that the gifted properties would be rented out at affordable rents that would be between 80 – 90% of market rates and that the bungalows were proposed in response to the specific needs of the community.  The scheme enabled home-owners in family sized homes to  downsize to the gifted properties and rent their property to the Council.  Officers confirmed this was a mandatory requirement within the scheme and that the bungalows would be let to local residents.  In further response to the comments around the 4 No. gifted properties the Service Manager Strategy explained that this form of provision had been specifically requested in the Development Brief. Councillor Peers raised further concerns around the education contribution to Sychdyn Primary School and the proposed site density.

On being put to the vote, the proposal to approve the application, subject to conditions and the inclusion of the increase in S106 contribution as referred to in late observations, was carried.

RESOLVED:

That conditional planning permission be granted subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation to provide for:

(a)       Control the provision and occupation of 4 No. bungalows within the development which are proposed to be gifted to the Council to meet     affordable housing needs.

(b)       Ensure the payment of an educational contribution of £49,028 towards school places at Sychdyn Primary School and £129,283 towards improving facilities to increase capacity at Argoed Secondary School.

And subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment)