Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies were received from the following:

Cllr Gunes Akbulut, substituted by Cllr Bektas Ozer

Cllr Ahmet Hasan substituted by Cllr Esin Gunes

Cllr Peter Fallart substituted by Cllr Alessandro Georgiou

To receive any declarations of interest.

None were received

To receive and note the covering report of the Head of Planning.

RECEIVED the report of the Head of Planning.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

2.  That the Head of Development Management be granted delegated authority to agree the final wording of the conditions to cover the matters in the Recommendation section of this report.

WARD: Whitewebbs

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Fidel Miller, Senior Planning Officer clarifying the proposals.

2.    The deputation of Steve Crofts who spoke against the officer’s recommendation.

3.    The responses of Mark Pender (Agent) and Chris Georgiou (Architect).

4.    Members debate and questions responded to by officers.

5.    Discussion in the meeting focused on concerns about parking, scale, mass, design of the proposed development, daylight and relationship to neighbouring properties and the effect of development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.  

6.    A motion was proposed by Cllr Rye, and seconded by Cllr Chamberlain against the officers’ recommendation to refuse planning permission. The Head of Development Management clarified the grounds for refusal arising from the discussions; notwithstanding the presumption in favour of approving sustainable residential development and the tilted balance. The Councillors declared the development is unsympathetic to and out of keeping with the character and appearance of the area/street scene, having regard to its height, sitting, scale and the degree of spatial separation between the properties.

7.    The majority voted against the motion, with 5 votes for and 7 against. The motion was not carried.

8.    The officers recommendation was then considered and agreed with 7 votes for and 5 against.

Agreed that:

The Head of Development Management be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning  General Regulations1992, the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

2. That the Head of Development Management be granted delegated authority to agree the final wording of the conditions to cover the matters in the Recommendation section of this report.

  WARD: Brimsdown

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Andy Higham, Head of Development Management clarifying the proposals.

2.    Members comments and concerns around future maintenance of the site and the potential for materials from the nearby site being toxic.

3.    Officers clarified that the funding for maintenance is in place and will be carried out by the Council. The landscaping works will use excavated soil from Durants Park wetlands including creation of 'mini-woodland' and  swales and is non-toxic.

4.    The unanimous support of the Committee for the Officers recommendation.

Agreed that:

The Head of Development Management be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

WARD: Highfield

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Gideon Whittingham, Planning Decisions Manager clarifying the proposals.

2.    The application is a Variation of condition 2 of 21/02685/FUL to allow change of use of land to community use involving installation of temporary building to provide community facilities including cafe, meeting room, function room, office and storage, toilets together with indoor and outdoor seating.

2.   The deputation of Councillor Nia Stevens who spoke in favour of the officer’s recommendation.

3.   Members comments that they are in favour of the application, recognising the benefits to the community from the development and use of the space, the provision of toilets and other facilities in the Councils parks in open spaces was especially welcomed.

4.   The unanimous support of the Committee for the Officers recommendation.

Agreed that:

The Head of Development Management be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That subject to the completion of a S106 to secure the matters covered in this report and to be appended to the decision notice, the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

2.  That the Head of Development Management be granted delegated authority to agree the final wording of the conditions to cover the matters in the Recommendation section of this report.

WARD: Town

NOTED

1.      The introduction by Max Leonardo, Planning Officer clarifying the proposals.

2.      Members during the debate supported the application commenting that the development fitted in well with the area and provides good family homes. Concerns regarding flood risks, CPZ arrangements and the size of the amenity space were acknowledged but taking account of the presumption in favour/tilted balance, recognised that the positives of the scheme outweigh these concerns.

3.      Officers responded confirming the finished floor levels will be raised by small ramps to the front doors and raised patios to the rear and as a result, the SuDs officer was satisfied and raised no objection. Future residents will be made fully aware of the CPZ scheme as they would not be permitted a permit to park. While the availability of parking was noted at certain times, the Transportation officer confirmed the restriction was also about reducing vehicle movements in this highly sustainable town centre location. The sizing of the amenity space on two of the properties is slightly under that recommended by policy for a 3-bed property. Officers confirmed this was a more functional arrangement that should be supported in light of the presumption in favour/tilted balance.

4.   The unanimous support of the Committee for the Officers recommendation.

Agreed that:

The Head of Development Management be authorised to grant planning permission subject to legal agreement and conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That planning permission be REFUSED

2. That the Head of Development Management be granted delegated authority to agree the final wording of the reasons for refusal as indicated in the Recommendation section of the report.

WARD: Brimsdown

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Gideon Whittingham, Planning Decisions Manager clarifying the proposals and confirming there have been an excess of 80 objections received since the report was written including that from Feryal Clark MP.

2.    The deputation of Salvio Daniele (Agent) who spoke against the officer’s recommendation.

3.    The deputation of Dylan Mitchell and Cynthia Otseh-Taiwo (local residents) spoke against the officers recommendation.

4.    The Chair invited the response of Sam Nanji (local resident), but he was not present.

5.    Members commented that it is rare and noteworthy to see residents coming to speak in favour of a development where there is a recommendation for a refusal. However, it was acknowledged it was unusual to see a recommended for refusal and the reasons for refusal need to be considered.

6.    Comments were made as to how the recommendation had come about and questions were raised regarding the pre application process.

7.    Officers responded as follows. 

·         The pre application response was not supported and identified many concerns about the proposed development.

·         The initial application was far larger with greater density, although harm has been reduced through revision in this application it is still deemed significant.

·         The application went to the independent Design Review panel, where the design specialists were highly critical of the development and deem the application far too deficient to be supported.

·         Section 106 contributions have been explored with developers but were not progressed given the unacceptability of the proposed development.

·         The recommendation was made in light of the presumption in favour/tilted balance approach but it was considered with harm from the reasons identified outweighs the benefits associated with this proposal including the delivery of residential accommodation.

8.    A motion proposed by Cllr Ozer, seconded by Cllr Gunes for the application to be granted based on the application offering 40% affordable housing accommodating Brimsdown need was put to the Committee.

9.    The Legal Representative clarified the extensive reasons for refusal were robust and defendable in light of the policy grounds identified which made an approval difficult without further assessment and review. Officers advised that prior to making a positive decision, Members should be aware of the justification/implications and the appropriate mitigation. The Head of Development Management suggested a deferral as this would be more appropriate and enable this to happen.

10. Cllr Ozer withdrew the motion for the application to be granted.

11.A motion proposed by Cllr Ozer, seconded by Cllr Rye to defer the item undertake further negotiations with the Applicant on the reasons for refusal identified.

12.The unanimous vote in favour of the motion.

13.    Members noted that they would like to defer the application to the October Meeting of the Planning Committee.

To note that the dates of future meetings are as follows:

Tuesday 06 September 2022 *Provisional

Tuesday 20 September 2022

Tuesday 18 October 2022

Tuesday 01 November 2022 * Provisional

Tuesday 22 November 2022

These meetings will commence at 7:00pm and will be held in the Council Chamber at the Civic Centre.

NOTED the dates of the future meetings.