Agenda item

PROPOSAL: Approval of reserved matters in respect of the appearance, landscape, layout and scale, pursuant to planning permission 15/00749/OUT, for the erection of 257 dwellings, hard and soft landscaping, car parking including garages, internal access roads, footpaths and circulation areas, public open space and associated works, together with additional details as required by conditions 2, 3, 7, 12, 13, 14, 20, 22 and 33 on the new Phase 5 of Land North of Innsworth Lane, Innsworth.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

49.38        This was an approval of reserved matters application in respect of the appearance, landscape, layout and scale pursuant to planning permission 15/00749/OUT for the erection of 257 dwellings, hard and soft landscaping, car parking, including garages, internal access roads, footpaths and circulation areas, public open space and associated works, together with additional details as required by conditions 2, 3, 7, 12, 13, 14, 20, 22 and 33 on the new Phase 5 of Land North of Innsworth Lane.  The Planning Committee had visited the application site on Friday 17 February 2023.  It was noted that Members had received an update sheet which included sensitive information and if those details needed to be discussed it would be necessary to move into separate business.

49.39        The Planning Officer advised that this was a reserved matters application seeking approval for access, appearance, layout and landscaping for 257 dwellings - 176 open market and 81 affordable – public open space and infrastructure pursuant to wider outline planning permission 15/00749/OUT for 1,300 dwellings.  The current application represented the whole of the Phase 5 residential area of the approved outline scheme shown in the revised phasing plan.  The application site was located in the eastern part of the outline site, adjacent to Frogfurlong Lane, and the reserved matters had already been approved for a number of other phases including Phase 1 East and Phase 2 to the south which were constructed/under construction.  The principle of residential development at this site had been established through the grant of outline planning permission and its subsequent allocation for housing in the Joint Core Strategy as part of the Innsworth and Twigworth Strategic Allocation (Policy A1).  The key principle guiding reserved matters applications had also been approved by the planning authority including a Site Wide Masterplan Document, site wide road principal infrastructure, including access onto Frogfurlong Lane, and site wide attenuation and drainage strategies.  Officers had worked closely with the applicant throughout the application process to ensure that the proposal accorded with the aspirations of the Site Wide Masterplan Document and, as set out in the Committee report, it was considered that the scale, layout, landscaping and appearance of the proposal was acceptable and of an appropriate design.  It was noted that the application site contained a number of green infrastructure corridors, including one to the north and one adjacent to Frogfurlong Lane.  Railings along the principal spine road would match phases to the south and street tree planting was incorporated into the layout.  In terms of flood risk and drainage, a detailed surface water drainage and Sustainable Urban Drainage System (SuDS) was submitted to, and subsequently approved by, the Council in October 2019.  The Lead Local Flood Authority had been consulted on the current scheme and had advised that the drainage strategy would be suitable as part of the overall approved drainage scheme.  The Environment Agency had also now confirmed it was satisfied and that all finished floor levels had been set at the appropriate height as required by the outline permission.  Members would be aware of a recent foul sewage leakage incident in proximity to this site and Officers had been liaising with the applicant and Severn Trent Water regarding this issue.  An update on the latest position was set out in the Additional Representations Sheet, attached at Appendix 1, and a representative from the Lead Local Flood Authority was in attendance to answer any questions on this issue; however, Members were reminded that the current proposal was a reserved matters application in respect of the layout, appearance, scale, landscaping and internal access arrangements and the determination of the application must focus on those reserved matters.  Taking all this into account, Officers considered that the proposed development was acceptable in regard to access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping in accordance with the Site Wide Masterplan Document and it was recommended that the application be approved.

49.40        The Chair invited the applicant’s representative to address the Committee.  The applicant’s representative advised that the application sought approval of the reserved matters application for 257 new homes in the latest phase of the development.  The quantum of development was previously permitted via an outline planning permission and accompanying Section 106 Agreement.  The Section 106 Agreement had been signed in advance of the applicant purchasing the site, as such, the development would be delivered in accordance with the approved obligations.  The approved Site Wide Masterplan and the Design and Access Statement set out the vision, objectives and development principles to guide and inform developers to ensure a consistent and coherent design approach.  The layout, appearance, scale and density of the proposed scheme were in accordance with the approved parameters.  Of the 257 homes, 81 were affordable, equating to 32% of the overall scheme in accordance with the Affordable Housing Section 106 Agreement.  The scheme would deliver a tenure mix of 60% affordable rented and 40% intermediate housing.  The affordable homes were evenly distributed through the site and designed to blend seamlessly with the market housing.  It was important to note that most of the homes in the scheme would be fully compliant with Building Regulations Part M4(2) which exceeded the minimum policy requirements.  The proposal delivered a well-designed street hierarchy, providing access and connectivity for all users including pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.  The amount of parking had been a key consideration in the evolution of the scheme and the proposal delivered 533 spaces for the 257 dwellings which exceeded the latest parking standards.  All proposed homes were located within Flood Zone 1 with all proposed floor levels set at an appropriate height, as such, the application was supported by both the Lead Local Flood Authority and the Environment Agency.  During consideration of the proposal, concerns had been raised by the local community regarding the safety of pedestrians crossing Innsworth Lane and, whilst that did not form part of the application, the applicant was working with Gloucestershire County Highways to deliver a suitable crossing solution.  Design proposals were under consideration and subject to a road safety audit which was currently being undertaken.  Through continued close working with Officers, the applicant had responded to all consultee feedback and approval was now sought from the Committee to deliver the next phase of quality and sustainable new homes. 

49.41        The Chair invited a local Ward Member to address the Committee.  The local Ward Member indicated that, as Members would be aware, he was not in favour of building in flood zones; however, this development was going ahead so he had to accept that and wanted to ensure it was done properly in order to get the best outcomes for the community.  Although not directly related to this application, he still had concerns regarding flooding; roads – particularly the access onto Frogfurlong Lane; other infrastructure, including schools, doctors, dentists etc.; and foul water management, especially given the recent happenings in the area.  The Committee report did not totally satisfy him but his main issue - which fortunately was now being addressed - was linked to road safety and the risk, most notably to children, of being exposed to crossing the roads given that schools were on the opposite side of the road.  He had raised these issues and was delighted the developer had been supportive and willing to fund a pelican or zebra crossing so he thanked them for putting people above profit and doing the right thing.  All consultees were satisfied with the proposal and raised no objection, aside from the Parish Council which had concerns in relation to matters which had been considered at the outline stage.  In summary, his main issues on this specific application had now been addressed, with the exception of foul water management, which he felt demonstrated how full and open communication could resolve a potential issue; however, there was a need to ensure that necessary conditions were in place and met the required timescales going forward.

49.42        The Chair indicated that the Officer recommendation was to approve the application and he sought a motion from the floor.  It was proposed and seconded that the application be deferred until a satisfactory solution to the sewage system for the entire strategic A1 site was found and proven to work in any weather conditions; to allow the submission of a traffic assessment of the strategic road network, including Frogfurlong Lane and Down Hatherley Lane; and to allow a comprehensive car parking assessment to be carried out, including at evenings and weekends.  The proposer of the motion noted from the Committee report that the pumping station had been upgraded prior to the disgraceful incident regarding foul sewage leakage.  He understood Severn Trent accepted no responsibility for the sewage system as it had not yet been adopted and, despite the Parish Council raising concern time and time again that the system could not cope, the statutory consultees had given assurance it could but it was now evident that was not the case.  In terms of the traffic assessment, he pointed out that it was difficult for two small vehicles to pass one another on Frogfurlong Lane, let alone large construction traffic, and he would like a car parking assessment to be carried out on evenings and weekends to establish the reality of the situation, rather than a desktop assessment.  The seconder of the motion indicated that the Committee often considered applications with problems with drainage or sewage and Members were told there was nothing which could be done but she now felt there was a situation where something could be done and the opportunity to insist on a better arrangement for sewage should not be lost.  In terms of the sewage leakage incident, she had contacted Tewkesbury Borough Council Officers to discuss what could be done about the sewage, which was also a problem in adjoining areas such as Churchdown, and had been advised that it should be left to disperse naturally.  Given the state of the waterways nationally she did not feel that encouraging more pollution was appropriate so this needed to be addressed.  She noted there appeared to be no social housing provision and she asked how social housing would be delivered if it was not required on major sites.  In response, the Planning Officer advised that, in terms of sewage infrastructure and whether the application could be deferred for that reason, Longford Pumping Station had been upgraded to meet the needs of the development, along with Twigworth, and Severn Trent had advised that the sewage system had sufficient capacity.  With regard to the recent leaking, surface water had infiltrated the foul network during times of heavy rainfall due to construction issues.  CCTV surveys and water pressure testing had been carried out on the Taylor Wimpey site and a number of areas had been identified where surface water had been getting in.  All issues were being rectified by the end of March.   Vistry was also carrying out CCTV surveys on the land at Twigworth site along a section from Innsworth to Longford Pumping Station which was being monitored by Severn Trent to find the cause.  Whilst there was no guarantee this type of incident would not happen again, it would need to happen whilst it was being monitored in order to identify where water was getting in.  It was important to separate wider issues from the reserved matters application of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale and to think very carefully of the implications of deferring the application for a substantial period of time in terms of the impact on housing development for the borough.  The local planning authority engaged proactively with Severn Trent and the developer and they were well aware of the issues and seeking to resolve the foul drainage matter.  In terms of traffic reports, outline planning permission had been granted for the site and highway safety on the strategic road network had previously been found to be acceptable in terms of the trip rate for the number of houses on the site.  In terms of the current proposal, whilst access was part of the reserved matters, this was in relation to the internal access as the wider strategic connection onto the A38 had already been agreed so the Officer opinion was that this was not a valid reason to defer the application.  In respect of the comprehensive assessment of car parking, on-site parking was in accordance with the Gloucestershire Manual for Streets which was standard across the county.

49.43        The proposer of the motion drew attention to the Additional Representations Sheet which set out that Severn Trent had referenced “times of high water table” as reason for the system failure.  He pointed out that rainfall in January 2022 was 474mm, which exceeded the 132mm in January 2023, so he was confused as to why the problem had not arisen last year.  He noted that Severn Trent could not guarantee there would be no further incidents but he was not willing to accept that.  In his opinion it was not satisfactory that people living in the wider strategic allocation were experiencing foul sewage escaping across the green infrastructure and into watercourses.  He asked what the Council’s Environmental Health team had done about this and asked for a response to be provided following the meeting.  He acknowledged that Taylor Wimpey was undertaking a programme of remedial works due to be completed by the end of March with future prevention measures being put in place and he asked for clarification as to what those were.  In terms of highways, he referred to the Ashchurch Parish Council appeal in relation to the bridge where it had been recognised that materiality was a matter for the decision-makers; the Planning Committee was the decision-maker in this instance so his interpretation was that, if the Committee felt additional information was required on certain matters in order to make a fully-informed decision, that should be provided.  Another Member indicated that, as she understood it, a deferral had been proposed based on three reasons, two of which could not be taken into consideration as part of the approval of reserved matters application – the foul drainage and the strategic road network - so she sought clarification as to whether car parking was an appropriate reason for deferral.  The Planning Officer confirmed that the foul drainage scheme had been approved for the site and the issues identified were being monitored separately and would be resolved outside of the reserved matters application.  Similarly, the impact on the wider road network had been assessed by the Secretary of State and there had been mitigation work on the adjacent highway network to account for the impact of 1,300 homes on the site; in terms of the access considerations for this application, that was in relation to the internal layout which included car parking arrangements, vehicle tracking etc.  The proposer of the motion to defer the application reiterated that he felt the reasons he had put forward were material considerations, not just in terms of the existing dwellings but those which were to come.  He was not suggesting the application be refused, and he agreed that the site needed to come forward, but that should not be at the detriment of existing or future residents.  In response, the Legal Adviser explained that what was material or not would differ depending on the type of planning application.  In this approval of reserved matters application the issues to consider were appearance, landscaping, scale and layout including internal roads.  The aspects which the proposer of the motion was concerned about were relevant considerations at the outline stage and if the application was deferred on the basis of those concerns, there was risk of a non-determination appeal and the Inspector could decide the Council was being unreasonable by holding out for reasons which were not relevant to the reserved matters application.  The seconder of the motion drew attention to Page No. 38, Paragraph 8.3 of the Committee report, which stated that a proposed drainage strategy plan had been submitted in support of the application and she questioned why that had been done if drainage was not a matter for consideration.  In response, the Planning Officer advised that a site wide drainage plan had been produced for the whole outline site and, as each reserved matters application came forward, it was necessary to establish that those drainage schemes were in accordance with the site wide drainage plan.  The representative from the Lead Local Flood Authority explained that the drainage strategy for this scheme should not be impacting in terms of the foul drainage issues currently being experienced.  Severn Trent had advised there was surface water getting into the foul system and, whilst that may be down to the quality of installation, it was not due to the drainage strategy for the site which separated foul and surface water completely. 

48.44        Upon being taken to the vote, the proposal to defer the application was lost.  It was subsequently proposed and seconded that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer recommendation and, upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED           That the application be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer recommendation.