Transcript

[BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO]

Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to the Huddersfield Planning Subcommittee meeting item, or it's the district, yes, thank you very much Teresa, well done. There's going to be a little announcement at the end of the meeting, so if members can just stay literally for five minutes, that'd be really helpful. Item number one then, a membership of the committee. [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, Chair, Councillor Lawson, substituting for Councillor Andrew Marchington, thank you. [BLANKAUDIO] Okay, then item number two, minutes of the previous meeting. [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, item number three, declarations of interest and lobbying. [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, Chair, I've just heard one email from the injector, which I acknowledged, no advice given. Yeah, about three emails, an action taken up on the sheet. [BLANKAUDIO] Yeah, item 20-22-9-2-1-0, I've had a few emails from objectors, no, action taken. Thank you, Councillor Lawson. Thank you, Chair, I've substituted, I seem to have missed all the lobbying, so no lobbying. [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, I myself have had three emails from objectors, no response provided. Item number four, admission of the public. There's no private items, Chair. Item number five, public question time. No questions. Thank you. Item number six, deputations and petitions. No receipt. Okay, item number seven, just to confirm, there was one site visit on this agenda, and we attended. Okay, and then we're up to the first application, then page number nine. Application number nine, application for outline of residential development, five to seven orks lane brockles. [BLANK_AUDIO] Thank you, Chair. My name is William Simcock, and I'm the case officer for this application. The site comprises a plot of land on the northern side of oaks lane. It slopes seepy from east to west, and also slopes downwards to the northern end of the site where it is bounded by a water course, an open water course that becomes culverted near the western border. The site is located near the edge of the built up part of brockles village. The proposal is an outline application for the direction of five dwellings and associated works. It is being considered as the principal development plus details of access, scale, layout and appearance. As shown on this site proposed layout plan here, a new access road leading to a turning head will be formed from oaks lane, leading to the northern end of the site, and the dwellings will be situated to the east of the access road. And would be in the form of a road three townhouses, which would be three storey at the front, and two storey at the rear. The site just to run through some of the constraints, the site is within a strategic green infrastructure network. This designation does not imply there is a presumption against new housing development subject to maintaining the function and connectivity of the network. The proposal is a large number of local objections, and there are certain factors that is recognised, such as the site's topography, which present challenges to development, and these I shall return to shortly. It is also noted that there is a public right of way at one side of the site connecting with oaks lane. The proposal has undergone many revisions and the first of these is to determine that the application could not be assessed solely as a principle of development plus. And ever plus access, but also details of scale, layout and appearance were also necessary in order to full assessment to be undertaken. These have been submitted. Sorry everybody, we are having a few technical issues here, so we are going to go for a very sharp pause until we can fix it and we will hopefully come back. I think I have got it to work again. Yes, I have got it. We won't be going for a very sharp pause, we will be carrying on. Yes, my apologies. This is the full set of elevational drawings, which can be seen. The plots one, two and three, which are close to the southern end of the site, and this is the rear elevation. And these are the other two, which are two story throughout and situated close to the north. The full set of details of scale layouts and appearance were supplied. And the also subsequent revisions included revised range assessment, modification to road layout and junction design and the reduction in number of units from 7 to 5. These are some images of the site, from the highway and from within the site, looking back towards number 5 and number 7. And view across the site towards number 9 and alternative view down towards the northern end. And view from public footpath and again looking back up towards number 5 and number 7. Now, the site occupies a position close to the built up edge of Brockholes and housing density and design is quite variable in the local area. As it says in the report, in the immediate vicinity of the site, it is mostly relatively low density, but there is high density development to other parts of Brockholes. And the older parts of the village and even in some parts of Brockholes quite close to its edge. The proposed dwellings and unassociated works would be built on lands presently undeveloped and from some viewpoints would present a undeveloped aspect. As such, it is very important that the scheme is designed not to introduce a very excessive scale or density development into the area. And for these reasons, it was revised so the junction, the turning heads could be switched around to the right. This presents a somewhat less engineered appearance that will be necessarily be quite a high retaining wall here, about 2.3 metres in height. But this layout does represent an improvement. The number of units has been reduced, the quantum of development. And it is the net density at 40 units per hectare is considered efficient and appropriate for the area. The detailed design is also considered appropriate and in keeping with the local house types. The frontages are not dominated by car parking or that they have car parking in the frontage, but some landscaping as well. And some land within sight would be retained open space, this banking here leading up to the retaining wall. This would not be public open space, but would be intended to be landscaping and a semi-natural appearance. It is considered that this would not result in loss or degradation of any future of the local landscape as set out in Home Valley parish councils and landscape character assessments. Or results in the loss of distant views. Moving on to the question of residential amenity. The minimum distances, recommended minimum distance in principle 6 of the house builder's design guide are taken as a starting point. However, paragraph 720 of that document states that there are several design solutions that will allow for reduced distances between buildings, including the angles of facing elevations on the orientation of the buildings. And the size uncle and designer of the story windows to minimize overlooking, including offset windows, and giving consideration to the advice that are put in principle 14, including the internal layout of dwellings. In this case, in most respects, the new dwellings will fully comply with the recommended minimum distances in that the main aspect to the front and rear. They would comply with the recommended 21 meter standoff distance. It is noted that in relation to number seven oaks lane, they will be, well, particularly one and plot one and two, and especially plot one will be closer. That distances between a new bedroom window in plot one and an existing cleared lays window in number seven here would be as little as 11.5 meters. The angle between the two means they would, in effect, be looking across rather than at each other, and furthermore, the new dwelling would be a full story lower. In the rear garden floor, sorry, ground levels would be somewhat reduced from present levels, and details of this can be submitted as part of the landscaping scheme. On the original layout of plot one would have been somewhat closer, and the relationship would have been intrusive, and even with the present layout, it might have been considered unacceptable if both properties were the same height relative to each other, but again, plot one is a lot lower. And it is considered with the original shown, and whilst possibly still a finely balanced case, it is considered that no material loss of privacy would occur to existing occupiers. The floor space within the new dwellings is of an acceptable level, and meets with the nationally described space standards. It is considered that they would receive adequate natural light, and the gardens are acceptable in terms of size and usability. It is therefore concluded that the design of the proposed developments would allow future residents to enjoy good standards of immunity, and the scale, site, and orientation of the new dwellings, subject to the reduction in ground levels within the rear of plot one, would avoid giving rise to any material loss of privacy or overbearing impact on existing residential properties. Moving on to the highway safety issues, an access statement has been submitted. It is considered that Oaks Lane is of a sufficient standard to absorb the traffic generated by the development. Visibility displays as indicated in the access statement do not take into account steep gradients, and especially being close to the brow of the hill. However, the highway's officer and myself, the case officer, did not take a joint site visit, and we were able to verify that the required site line of 36 metres based on the speed, so it would be achieved at least at the access. The internal access road would not be too adoptable standard, but it is considered that it is of a sufficient standard to take on traffic arising from the development, and refuse collection would be undertaken from the curbside. So, refuse collection vehicles wouldn't have to enter the site, and a bin collection point has been shown at an appropriate distance in from the public highway. The parking, both in terms of number of spaces and layout and size, meets current minimum standards. The public right of way would not be directly affected. It would be retained on its present course, and it has been recommended as a condition of granting planning permission that the issue be shown as part of the landscaping scheme, that it's a minimum of 1.2 metres throughout its length. 1.2 metres width is, in fact, it's stated width on the definitive map statement, or emphasized that there is no evidence that either the developer or the applicant that is or the previous owner of the land has any way encroached on the public right away. However, the fact that as the condition will ensure that it is 1.2 metres when completed, and that furthermore, the details of any new boundary treatment or fencing need to be supplied, this could be considered a small improvement. Quite large retaining walls will be required as previously stated, and these would, of course, be subject to the standard conditions on technical design approval in the interest of stability. I'd also make the observation at this point that the development on the site has been refused once before. The inspector's appeal decision letter for this application, the 2001 application, concluded that intervisibility for the development then proposed, three dwellings would be inadequate. This was, however, on the basis that sightlines are two metres by 70 metres would be required, which would have been in accordance with the guidance document in force at the time, design bulletin 32. Furthermore, five oak's lane itself was not in the application site, so the applicant's ability to provide sightlines and ensure their attention would have been much more limited. It's therefore considered that circumstances and policy contexts that led to the refusal of application 2001, 90381 were materially different than those that existed. If you had to be refused, that is, and would not provide a precedent for refusing the current application. While on the subject of the 2001 application, the other two reasons were that it was a greenfield site, which, of course, would not be a valid reason for refusing the present time, since there's no presumption against development of greenfield sites before brownfield ones. And it would also be an inefficient use of land, being less than 30 dwellings per hectare, which this has a greater density than that. Now, to conclude this section, highway development management did raise several concerns about the plans, as originally submitted, owing to lack of detail and clarity concerning parking arrangements, and how the new junction would interact with the public right away, and general layout, full and suitable to adoptable standards, all of which have been satisfactorily addressed by the submission of the mounted additional plans. The proposal is now considered to comply with the aims of local plan policies and Home Valley policies concerning highway safety. And it is therefore recommended that outline permission can be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the report. In particular, I would note that one change that's been made in the process is that the junction, the line of the junction under the original version would have cut across the line of the public right away, leading to possible pedestrian vehicle conflicts, and this is no longer the case. The path taken by vehicles and not taken by pedestrians would be separate. The drainage is an also another factor that is needed careful consideration. The site is not within flood zone two or three, but there is a small area within the site, near this corner, which is considered liable to flood. This is the source of the flooding into the watercourse, and this is likely to occur when the culverts can't discharge water quickly enough in heavy rainfall events. This can be exacerbated by blocking the entrance to the culvert where there is a trash screen. For the reasons set out in detail in the report, the development now proposed would not make these problems worse. It would not result in the new houses being vulnerable to flooding, nor would it displace flooding and make it worse at locations outside the site. Indeed, it could even be a net improvement as it could be achieved by condition and through the applicant entering into a section one of six agreements. There would be a management plan in place for the drainage infrastructure, that is the flood attenuation storage, and for the installation and maintenance of an improved trash screen to prevent blocking of the culvert. The climate change objectives initially highlighted as a concern by Home Valley Parish Council have been addressed. It is noted that the new houses would have given a solar array, which can be seen on the southeast elevations. There is a coal mining legacy, which was a concern raised early in the process. Following the submission of coal mining risk assessment, the coal authority and officers are satisfied as capable of being developed and subject to conditions. There are no grounds to believe in the site itself to be contaminated. landfill gas migration for a closed landfill site within 250 metres of the site could still occur. This was highlighted by environmental health as not being addressed in the Phase 1 contamination report, but it is considered that an appropriate response would be to impose a pre-commencement condition. The ecology issues, the site is not within the wildlife habitat network, which lies about 30 metres to the northeast. The preliminary environmental assessment, so an ecological assessment has been submitted, which finds the site a moderate ecological value. Some small trees and shrubs will be lost. It is not completely clear if it plans whether this row of small silver birch trees will be retained or not. That is something that is possible that the applicants could advise us on. The landscape and ecological management plan is recommended. It should be conditioned to ensure that there is a measurable habitat improvement. There are as well as further conditions that have been recommended by the council ecologist. I would emphasise here that the application is submitted before the Environment Act and Subsequent Guidance, which made the 10 per cent biodiversity net gain mandatory for new built developments. But it should still all development should seek to enhance the biodiversity of the site in as far as is reasonably practicable. Section 106 agreement, which I mentioned earlier, it is recommended that it is approved. We delegated and subject to the completion of the list of conditions and the securing of a Section 106 agreement covering the establishment management company management plan to ensure that service water drainage infrastructure is carried out in a satisfactory manner. And also for the future management and maintenance of semi-natural open space within the site, which will be the subject of a landscape and ecological management plan as well. So to conclude, our officers recommend conditional offline permission can be granted. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, William. So the first speaker is the agent, Nick Wilick. Good afternoon, Nick. Welcome to the meeting. Thank you. Good afternoon, Committee. My name is Nick Wilick, planning agent for this case. This infill site is within a sustainable urban location, an easy walking distance of local shops, Brockhole School and regular bus and train services. We worked in full cooperation with our officers to reduce the scheme from 7 to 5 houses, change other aspects of the design and layout and provide additional information when requested. With regard to the comments raised about highway safety from local residents, a professional speed survey was carried out to demonstrate that average speeds on this road are 25 miles per hour, with many cars observed to be travelling at 20 miles per hour or less. And this is because Oaks Lane is not a road where drivers would naturally speed. It is a quiet residential road where access is only needed to the housing beyond, and therefore the visibility display is provided unsuitable and will ensure the proposed access is safe. It is also agreed that this small number of additional houses would not material impact on volumes of traffic on Oaks Lane. Only four trips during peak hours are predicted for these five new houses, either in or out. There is only one car movement every 15 minutes in the peak hour, and much less outside those peak hours. In fact, anecdotally, we counted the number of vehicles passing the proposed site entrance while the site visit occurred this morning, and it was only 21 cars in 27 minutes. That's one car every 78 seconds, which is extremely low. Furthermore, whilst there is talk of the proximity of the access to the footpath used by some parents and children at school times, I have to inform the committee that my client's family gifted this path to the local community some years ago, and so its very existence is a bonus, not a problem. Because Oaks Lane acts as an overspill pickup and drop-off area compared to the more constrained rock holes lane where the school is actually located. Indeed, children from the proposed houses will also be able to use this path to walk safely to and from school every day in future. Your officers have confirmed that there will be no safety risk to users of this footpath, and there is now agreement in place to widen this path at the identified pinch point. In summary, this application would provide a much needed small development of five dwellings, which will help contribute towards the council's chronic under-supply of housing, and also help prevent the equivalent area of Greenbelt land being needed in the forthcoming local plan review. The Home Valley neighbourhood plan also supports housing located on non-Greenbelt sites within existing settlements. We would therefore like to endorse your planning and highway's officers' recommendation to grant outline planning permission in this case. Thank you. Thanks, Nick. Second speaker, Councillor Charles Grieves. Hi, Charles. Thank you, Chair. So, there's two points where I think the decision is in the balance. One of those is the three-story aspect, which is covered in 1017, and the other element is the distances between the properties which is covered in 1030. So, this site is right in the heart of Brockalls. It's quite a visible site, not just from Oak's lane and the footpath, but from Brockalls lane, which is the other side. In respect of the three-story element, actually, this part of Brockalls is characterised more by bungalows. The cutting is located much further up the road, took to way on the right-hand side. The distances between the windows, as is noted in the report, doesn't meet the standard. But I think, you know, the proposals come a long way since it first came back towards two years ago. They've dropped from seven to five. They've looked on making improvements to that proud with the highways issues being addressed. So, I think a little bit further, and we will end up with something that will be acceptable all around. And on that, I would ask that the committee defer approval and ask for those three-story properties to be changed to a two-story property, and for that distance that's within our standards to be achieved. And I think that can all be done by reducing from five units to four units. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Grieves. We have no more speakers, so it's over to the committee for your comments. Anybody? Councillor Sokel, and then Councillor Bellamy. Yeah. Can I ask about this open space? Yeah. You say on the first page, a picture, many maintenance of open, semi-natural, I've never heard before. He says, having natural open space. Can you tell me where you will be located? Will we look at it somewhere safe, where the children can play safely, or is not dumping in somewhere on the one corner? I want to know, I think. Thank you, Councillor Sokel. Will you be looking up, and I'm sure you'll get us that. We'll go to Councillor Donne Bellamy next. Thank you, Chair. I have got some concerns with this one. I'm going to go now. Topography, the distances, I actually agree with what Councillor Grieves said, maybe if it could be reduced, we might get them distances in. I'm also not happy about being three-star, is it? A lot of the houses around there, at the most the two-star is unless you go right up to the cutting. They are bungalows, so I do think they will look very much out of place. That public footpath is extremely busy, and you do get cars parked on Oak's lane because they drop the kids there because they can't park round by the school. So there's a lot of park cars there in the morning, at school times. I understand that there could be improvements to the footpath, which I think is probably a good thing. I also have concerns with what Councillor Sokel's brought up about that bit of open space and wildflower gardening thing. Whatever is always going to be responsible for that, is it just going to turn into a mess? So at the moment, I'm not convinced, and I probably would look at maybe deferring and going back and getting a bit more information. Thank you, Councillor Bellamy. Councillor, I think you would. Councillor McGrath, and then Lawson. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Councillor. Okay, thank you, Councillor McGrath, Councillor Lawson, and then Councillor. Thank you, Chair. I think it's notable just how much work the developers have done on this to address some of the problems that have been, that have arisen in the past, and to address those problems that were, that were at the forefront in the original appeal, because that's one of the first things that I was thinking about was, well, why was it refused in the first place and what were the reasons. And I think changes of circumstances and steps that the developers take are all welcome, and I think we shouldn't underestimate that amount of work that's happened. That said, I do still have issues about the dominance of these two blocks, and that being at odds with the Home Valley development specifications, their own plan. And I'd just like to think about just how those two are at odds with each other. Again, with Councillor Sokels analysis of the maintenance of the green area, that could possibly be conditioned. I couldn't see it unless it's in the standard conditions. I didn't get it on those glances, so maybe we often set up a company, don't we, for that kind of maintenance. So, yes, the three stories, the maintenance area, the dominance of those buildings in the site are uncomfortable with backing those at the moment, but I'll see what officers have to say when you come back in. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Lawson, Councillor Firth, and then Councillor Woodward. Thank you, Chair. I've listed closely to what Colleagues and the officers have said, and of course I was there on the site visit this morning, and I realise it's a difficult site to develop, but I think you clearly can see the work that the developers have put into this and planning it quite cleverly. So, I think it's an innovative use of a very difficult site. I think just about all the angles have been covered, and I particularly like when it says the materials will be sort locally and presumably stone. So, that PV is to be fitted. The standard of insulation is really high from what I read, and I think it's a pretty good development on a tight spot, and I will move the officer recommendation. Thank you, Councillor Firth, so it's been moved by Councillor Firth, Officer's recommendation to approve. Councillor Homood. Yeah, just to sort of question, comment based on the comments that were made. So, on the three-starry properties, I just want to make sure I'm understanding the diagrams and stuff correctly, but I'm just trying to understand this. What's the benefit of having a two-starry property? Because, isn't it sort of dug in? So, presumably, the ground floor is just the utility and garage that doesn't require any natural light necessarily coming in. If you had a two-starry property, would you actually be achieving a lower height of roller? It's what I'm trying to say in terms of prominence. I don't know if I'm understanding that correctly, or whether you're just taking away the garage, essentially for no particular purpose. Through you, Chair, it's a split-level dwelling at the moment, so it's three stories at the front and two stories at the back. It's not unusual to have split-level dwellings that are two stories at the front and a single story at the back. You still can mix the accommodation between floors. I suppose what I'm getting at is if you had, as someone suggested, if you made it two-starries, would you be able to do that because you wouldn't have habitable rooms on the ground floor? Is that correct or am I missing that's done, didn't that? You could design a property with habitable rooms on the ground floor. And they would have enough light? Yeah. Thank you, Councillor Donabell. Thank you, Chair. Can I move deferral, please, so this can be looked at? And also, if for any reason he's likely to go through, I think we need to see a construction management plan before. Thank you. So, it's been moved by Councillor Firth to approve Officer's recommendation. It's been moved by Councillor Bellamy for deferral. Thank you. Councillor Homood. Our second Councillor Firth to move approval. Okay, so we have a mover and a seconder for Officer's recommendation to approve. Councillor Safta has seconded Councillor Bellamy for deferral. Thank you. So, we will move to the vote. We are voting to approve the officer's recommendation as that came first. Councillor Sokol. What? Vote. Vote. 4. Against deferral. Against. Against. Against. I think it's, yeah, so mine would be for Officer's recommendation to approve. That would give you a casting vote. Yeah. And, yeah, my casting vote would be for to approve. Right, so the application is approved. Yeah, so the application is being approved. Thank you. See you at the meeting. [BLANKAUDIO] [BLANKAUDIO]