Minutes:
This application was being reported to the Planning Committee because five (or more) objections had been received and therefore, the proposal fell outside of the scheme of Delegation.
Officers presented the report and in doing so,
drew Members’ attention to the presentation slides on pages 5
to 9 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack.
The application was for the Land South of Crumpfields Lane, Webheath, Redditch, Worcs. B97 5PW and sought Permission In Principle for the erection of up to 9 dwellings.
Officers clarified to Members that before them was a Permission in Principle (PIP) application and not a Planning application. Officers further clarified that a PIP application was a route that developers could pursue to secure predominately housing led developments. This type of application was completed in two parts, the first part being the PIP and a subsequent Technical Details application and that development was not permitted until both parts were granted.
The PIP was to identify if the principle of the development was acceptable and that only the Location, Land use and Amount of development could be considered. All other factors would be considered during the Technical Details application.
The location of the development was detailed on page 5 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack. The development site was situated within the green belt as defined on the Local Plan proposals map and Officers stated that the development did not fall within one of the exceptions outlined under Paragraph 154 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in determining if development in the greenbelt was acceptable. However, for the reasons set out on pages 14 to 16 of the Public reports pack, Paragraph 155 of the NPPF (Grey Belt), was considered to apply, the development was therefore not inappropriate in the green belt, and the location of the development was deemed appropriate.
In addressing the other two areas which a PIP can consider, Officers detailed that the site location was close to transport links so would be considered a sustainable development and the proposed use and amount was keeping in line with the local area.
Officers commented that some concerns were raised regarding protected trees, drainage, cultural and conservation matters by consultees, however, those would be addressed during the technical details assessment if the PIP was approved by Members, and were not matters to be considered during the PIP application.
At the invitation of the Chair, Mr Alan Smith, the applicant, addressed the committee in support of the application.
After questions from Members the following was clarified by officers
Members then considered the application.
Members did not agree with the process of the PIP applications and felt that developers were using the process as an easy way to get their applications approved. Members also noted that whilst Redditch Borough Council could not demonstrate a 5-year housing supply, developers were open to freely bring applications forward under the new Grey Belt policy in the NPPF.
Members further noted that the application had a number of issues which needed to be addressed during the Technical Details part of the application process, however, in terms of the PIP part of the application process, they could not see a reason to refuse. Therefore, on being put to a vote it was:
RESOLVED that
having had regard to the development plan and to all other material considerations, permission in principle be GRANTED subject to the informative detailed on page 19 of the Public Reports pack.
Supporting documents: