Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Priory House, Monks Walk, Shefford

Contact: Leslie Manning  0300 300 5132

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

116.

Chairman's Announcements and Communications

To receive any announcements from the Chairman and any matters of communication.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Chairman advised the meeting that the order of business for the planning applications would be as follows:

 

Morning: Items 7, 8, 6, 10, 12, 11.

Afternoon (post 1.30 p.m.): Items 13, 15, 14, 9.

 

With reference to the position regarding the emerging Local Plan the Chairman read out the item included in the Late Sheet on this issue.

 

 

 

117.

Minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on 31 January 2018 (copy to follow).

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 3 January 2018.

 

In addition, the Chairman agreed to take the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 6 December 2017 as an urgent item of business.  As required by the Constitution these minutes were to have been confirmed and signed by the Chairman at the Committee’s meeting on 3 January 2018.  However, the minutes had not been published and made publically available by that time.  The minutes should therefore have been included on the agenda for the current meeting (31 January 2018) for approval but had been omitted in error.

 

RESOLVED

 

that the minutes of the meetings of the Development Management Committee held on 6 December 2017 and 3 January 2018 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

 

 

 

118.

Members' Interests

To receive from Members any declarations of interest including membership of any Parish/Town Council consulted upon during the planning application process and the way in which a Member cast his/her vote.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

(a)

Personal Interests:-

Member

 

 

 

 

Cllr C Gomm

 

Cllr A Brown

 

 

Cllr E Ghent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr T Swain

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr N Young

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr N Young

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr N Young

 

 

 

Cllr K Matthews

 

 

 

 

 

Cllr K Matthews

Item

 

 

 

 

14

 

10 & 12

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

 

13

Nature of Interest

 

 

 

 

Ward Member

 

Ward Member

 

 

Recently became Executive Member for Assets.  Was not previously involved in this application which is on CBC land.

 

Lives within the ward less than 5 minutes walk from the application site.  Not involved in Houghton Regis Town Council discussions.

 

May have met applicants in his capacity as a former Portfolio Holder and as the current Executive Member for Regeneration.

 

Has discussed the previous Wixams application with the developer but not this one.  Has met the applicant’s agent previously regarding other proposals.

 

 

 

 

 

Dealt with the grant of a lifetime agreement.

 

Due to a previous position within CBC he knows the speaker.

 

 

Knows both speakers.

Present or Absent during discussion

 

Absent

 

Absent

 

 

Present

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Present

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Absent

 

 

 

Present

 

 

 

 

 

Present

 

 

 

 

 

 

(b)

Personal and Prejudicial Interests:-

Member

 

 

 

 

None.

Item

Nature of Interest

Present or Absent during discussion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(c)

Prior Local Council Consideration of Applications

Member

 

 

Cllr R Berry

 

Cllr M Blair

Item

 

 

15

 

7 & 8

Parish/Town Council

 

Leighton-Linslade

 

Maulden

Vote Cast

 

No

 

No

 

 

 

 

 

 

119.

Planning Enforcement Cases Where Formal Action Has Been Taken pdf icon PDF 48 KB

 

To consider the report of the Director of Regeneration and Business which provides a monthly update of planning enforcement cases where action has been taken.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Chairman advised Members to raise any issues they might have with regard to the planning enforcement cases with the Planning Enforcement and Appeals Team Leader.

 

 

 

120.

Planning Application No. CB/17/00981/OUT (Ampthill) pdf icon PDF 72 KB

 

Address:       Land north of Clophill Road, Maulden, MK45 2AE

 

Outline: Erection of 21 dwellings with estate road.

 

Applicant:     Mrs Cowell and Mrs Donnelly

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/00981/OUT, an outline application for the erection of 21 dwellings with estate road on land north of Clophill Road, Maulden, MK45 2AE.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional comments as set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Maulden Parish Council, an objector to the application and the agent for the applicant under the public participation scheme.

 

A Member sought clarification from the Parish Council representative as to whether the draft Neighbourhood Plan had been submitted.  The Parish Council representative replied that nothing had been published.

 

The Chairman sought clarification from the objector following the latter’s reference to a flood plain.  In response the objector stated that his own land was sodden after rain and the path and local road were virtually unusable because of the mud washed there from Trilley Fields.  The Chairman stated that, whilst acknowledging the comments made, the site did not appear to be within a designated official flood plain.  The objector added that he had been advised by a representative of the Water Board that whilst his own property was not in a flood plain he was as close as was possible.

 

A Member sought clarification from the applicant’s agent as to whether all of the proposed dwellings would be constructed within five years and, if so, whether he  would accept a condition to that effect.  In response the applicant’s agent advised that a condition could only state when a development should commence.  However, he stated that a small local builder would build the dwellings over a 18 month to two year period and they would be available through a single sales outlet.  Further, as it was an outline application at this stage, there would be a delay for various reasons before building started.  However, the applicant’s agent felt comfortable that the dwellings would still be delivered within a five year period.  In response the Member stated that the Council’s legal advice was that it was acceptable to condition that homes would be delivered within five years.  He acknowledged that this condition had not been tested in court and that it had been introduced before the Council had a five year land supply.  He stressed however, that there would be a condition or directive to this affect if the Committee approved the application to ensure the a contribution to an ongoing five year land supply.  The applicant’s agent stated he had no objection to such a condition being imposed.

 

A ward Member stated that based on experience he believed that the applicant would attempt to seek a means of withdrawing from the provision of affordable homes in the development on the basis of viability.  He then stated that the application site was a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and that any building near it would impact on bio-diversity.  There had been no objection from the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 120.

At the conclusion of Item 7 above Councillor P Downing left the meeting

Additional documents:

121.

Planning Application No. CB/17/01156/OUT (Ampthill) pdf icon PDF 43 KB

 

Address:       Land east of No 13 Clophill Road, Maulden, Bedford, MK45 2AQ

 

Outline Application: Residential development on land north off Clophill Road, Maulden including other associated works.

 

Applicant:     Aldbury Homes

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No.  CB/17/01156/OUT, an outline application for a residential development including other associated works on land east of no. 13 Clophill Road, Maulden, MK45 2AQ.

 

Prior to consideration of the application the Chairman reminded the Committee that consideration of this application had been deferred at the meeting held on 3 January 2018.  As a result the applicant had appealed to the Planning Inspectorate on the grounds of non-determination and the Inspectorate would now determine the application.  However, the Council could still express a view on the application and so the Committee was asked whether it was minded to approve or minded to refuse the application before it.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional comments and additional/amended conditions as set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Maulden Parish Council, an objector to the application and the agent for the applicant under the public participation scheme.

 

A ward Member expressed general concerns on the process by which the Committee was expected to make its decisions.  He referred to the location of the application, the possible large scale development in the same area being considered by the Parish Council and contrasted it to the proposal before Members which would make no contribution to the village.  He stated that the village would continue to be developed as a ribbon development by continual infilling.  He endorsed the views of the Parish Council, which had strongly objected to the application, and commented that the Committee was bound by procedural dogma.

 

The planning officer responded to the points raised as follows:

 

·         The plans were illustrative and the officers were certain that they could achieve a satisfactory scheme through Reserved Matters. 

·         Structural damage by the applicant or developer was a matter outside the planning remit and would be dealt with as a legal matter.

·         Only limited weight could be given to the possible designation of the site as an important countryside gap under the emerging Local Plan and adopted policies took precedent.  Under the existing policies there was currently no designation for the site.  He referred to the criteria set out under national policy with regard to the weight which could be awarded to an emerging Local Plan and the policies within it.

·         No S106 contributions had been requested and no individual projects had been identified.  He suggested the Committee might wish to give the officers delegated power to explore this matter further, if the application was approved.

·         The concern was in connection with the loss of identity of village ends rather than the coalescence of settlements.  The indicative plan showed a large area of open space to maintain the individual character of the ends.  He acknowledged there would be harm to the landscape through development and urbanisation but given the level of weight given to housing provision in sustainable locations the benefits outweighed the perceived harm.

 

A Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 121.

At the conclusion of Item 8 above Councillor P Duckett left the meeting

Additional documents:

The Committee adjourned at 12.05 p.m. and reconvened at 12.15 p.m. All Members of the Committee were present

Additional documents:

122.

Planning Application No. CB/17/02575/OUT (Houghton Conquest and Haynes) pdf icon PDF 1018 KB

 

Address:       Land east of Ampthill Road and north of Bedford Road surrounding Great Thickthorn Farm, Houghton Conquest (nearest postcode MK45 3NQ)

                       

Outline application (with all matters reserved except access): Mixed use development with access from Ampthill Road and Bedford Road comprising up to 650 dwellings, children's play spaces, a countryside park comprising formal and informal open space and playing pitches, new woodland and other landscape works together with a localised footpath diversion, a site of up to 2.00 hectares for educational use and other associated works and operations including but not limited to demolition, earthworks and engineering operations (including in relation to utilities and drainage).

 

Applicant:     Old Road Securities plc

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/02575/OUT, an outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for a mixed use development with access from Ampthill Road and Bedford Road comprising up to 650 dwellings, children's play spaces, a countryside park comprising formal and informal open space and playing pitches, new woodland and other landscape works together with a localised footpath diversion, a site of up to 2.00 hectares for educational use and other associated works and operations including but not limited to demolition, earthworks and engineering operations (including in relation to utilities and drainage) on land east of Ampthill Road and north of Bedford Road surrounding Great Thickthorn Farm, Houghton Conquest.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional consultation/publicity response, additional comments and additional/amended conditions and amended/additional informatives as set out in the Late Sheet.  The planning officer also advised that:

 

·         the policy stated in the Late Sheet (under Additional Comments) should be HA1 reference HAS27.

·         The date for the submitted Parameter Plan mentioned in the Late Sheet (under Amended Conditions) should be May 2017.

·         The date of the footpath connections plan mentioned in the Late Sheet (under Condition 6) should be January 2018.

·         A late comment had been received from Bedford Borough Council regarding the secondary school contribution.  The planning officer stated that it was felt that this could be resolved by discussions with the Borough Council in relation to drafting the S106 agreement.

  

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Houghton Conquest Parish Council, an objector to the application and the agent for the applicant under the public participation scheme.

 

On behalf of the ward Member, who had been unable to attend the meeting, the Chairman read out a statement setting out the ward Member’s concerns and suggestions regarding the application.

 

The planning officer responded to the points raised as follows:

 

·         The proposed country park was to be delivered early in the scheme.  It would be planted as soon as was possible and prior to occupation.  Details of the trees to be planted would come forward under the requirements set out in proposed Condition 15 and the officers could ensure there was a mix of saplings and semi-mature trees as part of the scheme.  The planning officer explained that the country park could not be delivered prior to commencement because of the ground work and significant underground infrastructure that needed to be installed first.

·         With regard to the request that the site entrance be from the B530 rather than Bedford Road the planning officer stated that the highways issues were covered by the proposed highways related conditions including a requirement that the junctions of the proposed vehicular access points had been be constructed and a Construction Traffic Management Plan, which covered the routing of such vehicles.

·         The area of land at the B530 Ampthill Road/Bedford road junction which would be left once the road was diverted into the site was dealt  ...  view the full minutes text for item 122.

123.

Planning Application No. CB/16/05852/FULL (Shefford) pdf icon PDF 64 KB

 

Address:       Land off Harrow Way, Shefford (nearest postcode SG17 5GG)

 

Construction of six new dwellings.

 

Applicant:     Warden Developments Ltd

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/16/05852/FULL for the construction of six new dwellings on land off Harrow Way, Shefford.

 

No additional consultation/publicity responses, additional comments or additional/amended conditions were set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from an objector to the application under the public participation scheme.

 

A ward Member stated that there had been considerable development in Shefford over the last ten years.  Planning permission had been granted for over 330 homes within the last three years and these were currently under construction.  The impact of the occupants on local services could not, as yet, be fully gauged.  Whilst a large number of these new homes lay within the settlement envelope the application site lay outside the settlement envelope,  and should, he stated, be judged on its merits and against the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the Council’s planning policies.  He stated that there was no evidence that the application was sustainable.  Local schools were full and new residents were being offered school places for their children outside Shefford and this would lead to an increased number of car journeys.   Further, the design of the new dwellings was focused on family homes and would, therefore, attract additional families.  The ward Member next referred to the elevated north western part of the site giving rise to overbearing in relation to existing neighbouring properties and resulting in overlooking and overshadowing.  Residents had raised concern regarding the design and layout and the impact on their privacy.  The ward Member stated that there was no evidence that local residents views had been sought on the application prior to its submission and the application site was not in the emerging Local Plan and it would have a detrimental effect when Shefford was struggling to cope with the impact of existing developments.  He asked  that his comments be considered.

 

(Note: At this point in the proceedings Councillor Brown, as the second ward Member present, withdrew from the seating allocated to Members of the Committee and addressed the meeting from the public speaking point).

 

The second ward Member, who had called in the application, reiterated some of points already raised.  In particular he commented that approval of the application would set a precedent and encourage future applications to develop on land through to Hitchin Road.  He contrasted the relatively large size of the local population with the relatively small size of Shefford, which also included a flood plain within it.  The ward Member emphasised why the settlement envelope was of such importance to Shefford and should not be breached without full consideration.  He stated that the Council had a five year land supply and so should not encourage backland on backland development in open countryside.  He referred to the lack of school places and to an email, paper copies having been circulated immediately prior to the meeting, from the interim Head of School Organisation,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 123.

At the conclusion of Item 10 above Councillors M Liddiard and A Turner left the meeting

Additional documents:

The Committee adjourned at 1.26 p.m. and reconvened at 1.51 p.m. All Members of the Committee were present

Additional documents:

During consideration of Item 12 below Councillor Mrs S Goodchild entered the Chamber

Additional documents:

124.

Planning Application No. CB/17/05425/FULL (Shefford) pdf icon PDF 38 KB

 

Address:       The Pigling, Woodview Nurseries, Shefford Road, Meppershall, Shefford, SG17 5LL

 

Replace existing mobile home with a single storey two bedroom permanent dwelling.

 

Applicant:     Mrs D Hinton

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/05425/FULL for the replacement of an existing mobile home with a single storey two bedroom permanent dwelling at The Pigling, Woodville Nurseries, Shefford Road, Meppershall, Shefford, SG17 5LL.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to an additional comment as set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from an objector to the application and the applicant’s agent.

 

(Note: At this point in the proceedings Councillor Brown, as a ward Member, withdrew from the seating allocated to Members of the Committee and addressed the meeting from the public speaking point).

 

The ward Member stated that the existing mobile home and conservatory referred to in the officer’s report were unlawful structures and subject to enforcement orders.  The latest enforcement order had been reviewed on compassionate grounds and a lifetime agreement made with Council to delay the removal of the structures but on the immediate release of the land to the Council.  It had also been agreed that at the right time the site would be returned to open countryside under Meppershall Parish Council for the benefit of local residents.  With reference to the approval for the development of a neighbouring site the ward Member stated that the site had been approved by the Planning Inspector because the Council did not, at that time, have a five year land supply.  He added that the application was not sustainable, lay outside the settlement envelope in open countryside and adjacent to a private, ancient woodland.

 

(Note: At this point in the proceedings Councillor Young declared a personal interest as he had dealt with the grant of the lifetime agreement).

 

In response to the ward Member’s comments the Chairman stated that the application should be considered as any other planning application for a new, permanent dwelling and need not take account of the reasons for the lifetime agreement.

 

(Note: At this point in the proceedings Councillor Young briefly outlined the circumstances regarding the lifetime agreement and his role in its grant.  He then left the Council Chamber and took no further part in the debate or in the vote on this item).

 

The Chairman stated that he had been advised that, irrespective of what had gone before, the application was completely separate and should be treated on its merits.

 

In response to a Member’s request for clarification on the legal status of the existing mobile home a second planning officer explained that the building was unauthorised, subject to an enforcement notice and had no planning permission.  Whilst the proposed dwelling was a replacement for the existing mobile home the latter did not have planning permission.

 

The legal officer confirmed that there was no planning permission for the mobile home and that, as yet, no enforcement action had been taken.  She added that enforcement action was discretionary.  She stressed that the Committee had to consider what was before it.

 

(Note: In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 124.

During consideration of Item 12 above Councillor A Brown left the meeting

Additional documents:

At the conclusion of Item 12 above Councillor N Young re-entered the Chamber

Additional documents:

125.

Planning Application No. CB/17/02512/OUT (Houghton Hall) pdf icon PDF 42 KB

 

Address:       Land south of the bungalow, Bedford Road, Houghton Regis, Dunstable, LU5 6JS

 

Outline Application: Residential development of up to 1.03ha of the site with formation of two accesses, sustainable urban drainage and associated landscaping.

 

Applicant:     Haut Ltd

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/02512/OUT, an outline application for the residential development of up to 1.03ha of the site with the formation of two accesses, sustainable urban drainage and associated landscaping on land south of the bungalow, Bedford Road, Houghton Regis, Dunstable, LU5 6JS.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to additional additional/replacement conditions as set out in the Late Sheet.  The planning officer also advised that, further to page 162 of the agenda, he was able to confirm that the trial trench evaluation for the site had been commissioned together with a timetable for the works so there were no archaeology based objections to the application.  He also advised that the upper figure relating to the density of the dwellings was envisaged at approximately 30, this being regarded as more appropriate for a rural area.  The Chairman referred to the possible need to set an upper limit.

 

In advance of consideration of this item the Committee received a representation from the agent for the applicant under the public participation scheme.  The Chairman sought clarification from the agent as to whether the replacement of condition 14 and the introduction of new, additional conditions relating to highways matters were acceptable.  In his response, and whilst acknowledging the reasons why additional highway controls were being sought for this specific site , he stressed the need to consider the requirements arising from the development of Bedford Road as a whole given the possible wider impact.  He suggested that further discussion might reveal a better solution overall.  The Chairman stated that the Committee was required to determine what was before it but the applicant had the opportunity to seek amendments at a later date.

 

In response a Member stated that he was aware that local residents wished to see remedial works to Bedford Road.  Ward Members were strongly minded that an effective ramp would be a favoured solution.  Discussion took place on whether the application lay within in the Framework Plan and the Member stated that he had been assured that, whilst it wasn’t allocated, it was within the Framework area.

 

The agent stated that a tabled access was acceptable and that the question regarding the site’s position in the Framework site was ambiguous given the various plans available.  However, it was a site surrounded by development and treating it as a windfall site was possibly the best way forward in policy terms.

 

A local Member referred to her attendance at a meeting of the Houghton Regis Town Council’s Planning and Licensing Committee on Monday and sought assurance that the issues raised by the Committee and public, given the timescale, had been given due consideration.  She then welcomed the amended and additional conditions set out in the Late Sheet in particular with regard to the density and stated that she would prefer the maximum number of dwellings to be stated to avoid future doubt.  Following further comment she referred to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 125.

At the conclusion of Item 11 above Councillor Mrs S Goodchild left the meeting

Additional documents:

126.

Planning Application No. CB/17/04050/FULL (Cranfield and Marston Moretaine) pdf icon PDF 148 KB

 

Address:       Holywell Middle School, Red Lion Close, Cranfield, Bedford, MK43 0JA

 

Extension to reception area, new 7 classroom teaching block, new 3 court sports hall and changing area.

 

Applicant:     Ellis Williams Architects

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/04050/FULL for an extension to the reception area, new 7 classroom teaching block, new 3 court sports hall and teaching area at Holywell Middle School, Red Lion Close, Cranfield, Bedford, MK43 0JA.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee's attention was drawn to an additional/amended condition as set out in the Late Sheet.  The planning officer also advised verbally that there had been a request for an additional highways condition for a revised travel plan.

 

(Note: At this point in the proceedings the Chairman stated that he had failed to seek any declarations of interest from Members with regard to those planning applications to be considered during the afternoon session of the Committee.  However, Members stated that they had assumed the declarations provided at the beginning of the meeting covered the day in full.   The Chairman, Councillor Matthews, declared a personal interest with regard to the current application because he knew both speakers.  He also advised that he resided on the corner of Red Lion Close, Cranfield but would not be affected in any way by the application).

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Cranfield Parish Council and the applicant/Head Teacher under the public participation scheme.

 

A Member sought clarification from the Parish Council representative regarding comments made by the latter on the absence of the approved footpath (Church Walk) between Home Farm development and the school and the impact this would have in the form of increased vehicle use.  The Member advised that he had been asked by a ward Member to speak to the developer (Persimmon) in his capacity as Executive Member for Regeneration and bring forward the S106 obligation relating to this matter.  The meeting noted that the same ward Member was attempting to secure the provision of the footpath as quickly as was possible though complications existed.

 

A Member sought clarification from the applicant/Head Teacher regarding the poor state of the school's multi-use games area (MUGA) and the extent of its use.  In response the latter explained that the MUGA had restricted use during the summer because it was unsafe when wet.  However, the area of the MUGA that remained following the construction of the new sports hall would be resurfaced, marked out for use and made available to the community as would the new sports hall.

 

Another Member sought clarification relating to the number of students that were bussed to the school.  The Committee noted the number, geographical origin and that approximately 5 buses were employed.

 

The Committee considered the application and in summary discussed the following:

 

·         That the additional facilities were welcomed.

·         The recent consideration by the Executive of safer routes to schools and school transport plans and the availability of officers to assist schools with these issues.

·         That should traffic management issues arise they could be brought before the Council’s Traffic Management body for consideration.

·         That officers met with schools to discuss parking issues  ...  view the full minutes text for item 126.

At the conclusion of Item 13 above Councillor T Nicols left the meeting

Additional documents:

127.

Planning Application No. CB/17/05740/FULL (Leighton Buzzard North) pdf icon PDF 150 KB

 

Address:       65 Mill Road, Leighton Buzzard, LU7 1AX

 

Resubmission of Application No: CB/17/03798/FULL for change of use of dwelling to two flats and erection of two flats.

 

Applicant:     Mr and Mrs M Blair

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/05740/FULL for the resubmission of Planning Application No. CB/17/03798/FULL for a change of use of a dwelling to two flats and the erection of two flats at 65 Mill Road, Leighton Buzzard, LU7 1AX.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee's attention was drawn to additional consultation/publicity responses, an additional comment, additional/replacement conditions and additional informatives as set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received representations from Leighton-Linslade Town Council, an objector to the application and the applicant's agent under the public participation scheme.

 

The Chairman sought clarification on a point raised by the objector regarding the boundary fence with 2A Doggett Street.  The objector explained that the fence was property of the owner of 2A Doggett Street, not the applicant, and would not be reduced in height as was required by the highways officer.

 

The applicant’s agent stated that, if an agreement was necessary with the neighbour, it would be dealt with outside the application.  Should an agreement not prove possible then the possible reconfiguration of the parking arrangements would be examined.  The Chairman advised that depending on the extent of the reconfiguration a new planning application could be required.

 

In the absence of the ward Members for Leighton Buzzard North the Vice-Chairman explained that he had been asked by one of the ward Members to speak on the application.  The Vice Chairman explained that he was the ward Member for Leighton Buzzard South and a member of Leighton-Linslade Town Council for the ward in which Mill Road lay.  Having considered various issues, including that of the ownership of the boundary fence, he stated that he felt that he had to support the officer recommendation before the Committee to approve the application.

 

The planning officer responded to the points raised so far as follows:

 

·         She did not feel that there would be a materially harmful change to the character of the area.

·         The existing planning permission already provided for four parking spaces in the rear garden so it was difficult for her to object to an extra space set further away from the neighbours.  It was not felt that there would be a significant change of character  or that overdevelopment would arise.

·         The current application would extend the rear extension by a further 3.6m.  However, this would not be any further then the rear wall of 67 Mill Road.  The impact on 2A Doggett Street with regard to overbearing and light would be similar to the existing two storey rear extension at no. 67.  A condition has been proposed for obscure glazing which would prevent loss of privacy.

 

The Chairman referred to the issues relating to the ownership of the fence and the possible reconfiguration of parking.  He also referred to concern over the absence of separate parking for visitors but stated that this situation was no different than that which already existed for other residents.

 

The Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 127.

128.

Planning Application No. CB/17/04312/FULL (Flitwick) pdf icon PDF 108 KB

 

Address:       Land at 11 and rear of 13 The Ridgeway, Flitwick, Bedford,

MK45 1DH

 

Erection of one bungalow and one two storey house with access off Durham Close.

 

Applicant:     Acorn Building Services (Luton) Ltd

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/04312/FULL for the erection of one bungalow and one two storey house with access off Durham Close on land at 11 and rear of 13 The Ridgeway, Flitwick, Bedford, MK45 1DH.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee's attention was drawn to additional comments as set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received a representation from an objector to the application under the public participation scheme.  The Chairman sought clarification on an issue raised by the objector.

 

The Committee was advised that the ward Member (Councillor Turner), who had called in the application, had been present earlier and had intended to address the meeting but had been unable to stay beyond the lunchtime adjournment.  He had expressed his apologies at being unable to remain.  A member of the Committee (Councillor Gomm), who was also a ward Member, stated he would speak on the application.

 

The planning officer responded to the points raised so far as follows:

 

·         The trees on the site had no Tree Preservation Orders on them and they could therefore be removed at any time.

·         The parking of construction vehicles would be a temporary disruption.

·         The development of the land in question had not taken place at the same time as the erection of the other properties because the land had only become available after the original development had taken place.

·         There was no requirement for the provision of garages.

·         Any requirement for waking routes to local amenities only applied to new developments and could not be applied retrospectively.

·         The removal of permitted development rights was recommended in order to prevent the owner of the proposed bungalow from installing windows in its loft.

·         There was no overbearing or loss of light to the bathroom window in the existing neighbouring property.  Further, the position of the development was considered acceptable given the similar relationship between dwellings already present in Durham Close.

 

The Chairman referred to comment passed by the objector to the objections raised by local residents and how these had been ignored by the planning officer.  He briefly outlined the process by which the Committee was required to determine applications.

 

(Note: At this point in the proceedings Councillor Gomm, as a ward Member, withdrew from the seating allocated to Members of the Committee and sat at the seat allocated to public speakers in order to address the meeting).

 

The ward Member expressed his concern at the environmental impact of the application.  He stated that the development site provided a natural barrier and was of benefit to the area.  Should the development be approved it would result in extra vehicle movements and parking and have a detrimental impact on residents and the area.  He supported the refusal of the application.

 

(Note: Councillor Gomm left the meeting room at this point and took no further part in the debate or in the vote on this item).

 

The Committee considered  ...  view the full minutes text for item 128.

At the conclusion of Item 14 above Councillor C Gomm re-entered the Chamber

Additional documents:

129.

Planning Application No. CB/16/02972/FULL (Dunstable Icknield) pdf icon PDF 433 KB

 

Address:       Former Dukeminster Estate, Church Street, Dunstable (nearest postcode LU5 4FF)

 

Erection of 270 dwellings with parking and associated works.

 

Applicant:     Persimmon Homes North London

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/16/02972/FULL for the erection of 270 dwellings with parking and associated works at the former Dukeminster Estate, Church Street, Dunstable.

 

There were no additional consultation/publicity responses, comments or additional/amended conditions reported in the Late Sheet.

 

No representations were made under the public representation scheme.

 

The Committee considered the application and in summary discussed the following:

 

·         That the total provision of on-site affordable housing remained at 15% but the developer had advised that it was unable to deliver the proposed mixture of 10% shared ownership and 5% starter homes as this split was considered undeliverable.

·         That following consideration of the updated viability it was found that 15% shared ownership was the only comparable affordable housing mix that was relative to the cost implications of the original mix proposed. 

·         Concern at the absence of affordable housing for rental given the size of the development and local demand.

·         The planning officer’s confirmation that the viability of the revised scheme had been independently assessed and approved.  The Committee noted that it lacked the information to challenge the assessment.

 

On being put to the vote 9 Members voted for approval, 0 voted against and 1 abstained.

 

RESOLVED

 

that Planning Application No. CB/16/02972/FULL relating to the former Dukeminster Estate, Church Street, Dunstable be approved as set out in the Schedule attached to these minutes.

 

 

 

130.

Late Sheet pdf icon PDF 135 KB

 

To receive and note, prior to considering the planning applications contained in the schedules above, any additional information detailed in the Late Sheet to be circulated on 30 January 2018.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

In advance of consideration of the planning applications attached to the agenda the Committee received a Late Sheet advising it of additional consultation/publicity responses, comments and proposed additional/amended conditions.  A copy of the Late Sheet is attached as an appendix to these minutes.

 

 

 

131.

Site Inspection Appointment(s)

 

Under the provisions of the Members’ Planning Code of Good Practice, Members are requested to note that the next Development Management Committee will be held on 28 February 2018 and the Site Inspections will be undertaken on 26 February 2018.

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

NOTED

 

that the next meeting of the Development Management Committee will be held on 28 February 2018.

 

RESOLVED

 

that all Members and substitute Members along with the relevant ward representatives be invited to conduct site inspections on 26 February 2018.