Agenda item

The application was reported to Planning Committee for determination as the application was for major development as such the application fell outside the scheme of delegation to Officers.

Officers presented the report and in doing so, drew Members’attention to the presentation slides on pages 5 to 33 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack.

The application was for Brockhill East, Hewell Road, Redditch, Worcestershireand sought reserved matters approval for 109 dwellings and associated works and infrastructure.

Officers detailed that the application was part of a cross boundary development which extended into Bromsgrove District Council (BDC) which was addressed by application (22/01608/REM).

Page 8 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack detailed the phases for the development. Officers confirmed that Phases 1 and 2 had been completed and Phase 3 was in the process of being constructed, Phase 4 had also been approved but construction had not started. Officers further detailed that although Members were being asked to consider Phase 6, Phase 5 had not been submitted by the applicant. Officers commented that Phase 6 was a natural continuation from Phase 4 and comprised mostly 2-5 bed 2 storey dwellings.

Officers drew Members attention to the proposed Tenure Plan detailed on page 13 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack, and identified the location of the affordable housing units, being split between shared ownership and affordable rate properties.

The development followed the topography of the land with care being taken to consider overlooking properties/open space. The property per hectare rate was 32 dwellings which was lower than the previous phases of 37 dwellings per hectare, this had been predominately due to the larger proportion of 4/5 bedroom dwellings in Phase 6.

Officers identified that there was a shortfall of affordable housing in Phase 6 which the applicant assured would be compensated for during subsequent phases. Officers further identified that the overall development had an affordable housing provision of 30% in RBC and 40% in BDC. Officers assured Members there was sufficient protection in the Section 106 Agreement to enforce meeting the required quotas, therefore ensuring the affordable housing targets were achieved on the site overall. This would be considered under future phases.

Officers drew Members attention to proposed landscaping plans detailed on pages 26-32 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack. Officers further detailed the large amount of green space within Phase 6 which amounted to 77% of the site and included a range of landscaping, biodiversity, recreational and SuDs benefits. The plans also included additional native tree, hedgerow and shrub planting.

Officers detailed that the streets would track through Phases 5 and 6 and around the edge of the district centre to connect to Phase 2 with a carriageway. The applicant provided that the curved shape of the main road would provide traffic calming by reducing the speed of vehicles.

Sufficient parking would be provided for all dwellings on site and the development would provide an additional 22 spaces for visitors. Worcester County Council (WCC) Highways had been consulted and after several iterations had indicated no objections subject to Conditions.

North Worcestershire Water Management (NWWM) had also been consulted and had no objection subject to Conditions.

At the invitation of the Chair, Councillor Joe Baker, Ward Member for Batchley and Brockhill, addressed the Committee in objection to the application. Miss Harriet Jarvis, on behalf of the developer, also addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Officers clarified the following points after questions from Members.

• That the Terms “Flats” and “Maisonettes” in the report were used interchangeably and were both referred to the same properties, Officers indicated these to members shown in red on page 14 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack.
• The relevant payments had been received in line with the Section 106 Agreement, however, as a result of the Phase 6 application, further payments may be required.
• That all the concerns raised by WCC Highways, had been addressed in their entirety and WCC Highways had no objection to the application subject to Conditions.
• The Section 106 Agreement outlined money to be supplied to WCC Highways for the provision of a bus route, however, the plan for the route and accompanying bus stops had not been decided.
• That subsequent Phases would develop the road network and complete a through road for the whole development.
• All properties would be fitted with electrical vehicle charging points.

Members then proceeded to debate the application.

Members thanked Officers for their correspondence prior to the Committee meeting clarifying a few queries that they had. Members were pleased that the developer had decided to include an additional 22 visitor car parking spaces. However, Members were still concerned that there may not be enough parking and that people would still need to park on the road which would lead to difficulties with larger vehicles getting past.

Members expressed that they would like to have known about the future development which might take place as that could impact on the current site/application, but respected that it was not always possible.

Members were disappointed that the proposed bus route had not yet been identified, or that any provision had been made in the development for prospective bus stops to accommodate the public getting on/off in safety.

Members appreciated that they had to vote on the application as printed, however, they requested that Officers make note and feedback to the developer the concerns raised during the debate.

Members were reminded that they could only have regard to material planning considerations, it was reiterated by Officers that matters regarding the applicant’s history, previous development phases or the overall housing provision within the Council were not Material Planning Considerations.

It was noted that Councillor Khan left the meeting for part of the debate between 20:03 to 20:06 hours, therefore, he took no part in the vote or decision on the application.

On being put to a vote it was

RESOLVED that

having had regard to the development plan and to all other material considerations, planning permission be GRANTED subject to the Conditions outlined on pages 18-21 of the Public Reports Pack.