Agenda item - 19/01153/REM - Application for the approval of Reserved Matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) pursuant to outline permission ref. 16/1085 for residential development consisting of 150 dwellings together with access, parking, landscaping and associated works (Phase 3) - Longbridge East and River Arrow Development Site, Groveley Lane, Cofton Hackett - St. Modwen Homes Limited

Agenda item

19/01153/REM - Application for the approval of Reserved Matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) pursuant to outline permission ref. 16/1085 for residential development consisting of 150 dwellings together with access, parking, landscaping and associated works (Phase 3) - Longbridge East and River Arrow Development Site, Groveley Lane, Cofton Hackett - St. Modwen Homes Limited

Minutes:

The Chairman informed Members that officers would be presenting a joint presentation for Applications 19/01152/FUL and 19/01153/REM – Longbridge East & River Arrow Development Site, Cofton Hackett, but each Application would be considered, debated and voted on individually. 

 

At this stage in the meeting, the Committee agreed to change the running order of the agenda.

 

Officers gave a detailed presentation on Applications 19/01152/FUL and 19/01153/REM and in doing so reminded the Committee that outline planning permission was granted for 150 dwellings on this area of land under a hybrid application ref 16/1085.  The hybrid application had also included a detailed scheme for the community centre which had since been built and was now functioning on site.

 

Both applications were adjacent to each other within the area allocated as H2 in the Longbridge Area Action Plan on land formally known as East Works.  Birmingham City Council had no comments to make on either proposal and had not requested any open space contributions on this occasion.

 

The Committee then considered the Application, which Officers had recommended for approval.

 

Officers reported that one additional letter of objection had been submitted and that Condition 5 had been revised, as detailed in the published Update Report, copies of which were provided to Members and published on the Council’s website, prior to the commencement of the meeting.

 

This application was for the approval of Reserved Matters (appearance, landscaping, layout and scale), pursuant to outline permission for residential development consisting of 150 dwellings together with access, parking, landscaping and associated works (Phase 3).

 

The development comprised of a 5 storey apartment building providing 57 units.  Under croft car parking would be provided for the apartments with vehicular access off East Works Drive.

 

Officers further reported that Birmingham City Council had no objections to the scheme and had supported the proposals. 

 

There were a number of objections to the scheme which mainly related to traffic problems and the apartment building.

 

Officers commented that as stated earlier that, as a result of negotiations with the agent, Highways Authority and Urban Designer, it was agreed that a through route would be provided and that this would give good connectivity within the site.

 

At the invitation of the Chairman, Mrs. C. Naughton addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  A written statement from Ms. S. Jones, in objection to the application was read out by an officer. Mr. J. Tait, the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicant. 

 

With the agreement of the Chairman, Councillor J. E. King stated that she was disappointed that the Neighbourhood Development Plan had not been mentioned.  Neighbourhood Development Plans enabled local people to come together to decide how they wanted an area to develop and to minimise any impact on local residents, amenities and to give careful consideration to noise, privacy and light from any proposed developments.  The proposed 5 storey apartment building would be too high and overbearing, taking light away from the back gardens of the houses next to it and contravened H1.3 of the Neighbourhood Development Plan. 

 

Officers responded to questions with regards to car parking and stated that there was sufficient parking for the apartment scheme with under croft parking and parking bays reserved for the apartment building.

 

After officers had clarified where north was depicted on the relevant presentation slide, Members agreed that the proposed 5 storey apartment building would take light away and would certainly create shadows on the existing buildings and that that shadowing would prevent any evening sunlight to the houses behind the proposed 5 storey apartment building.  

 

Members commented that it was conflicting situation, they were aware that there was a shortage in meeting the Council’s 5 year housing land supply, however Members still had concerns about the size and location of the proposed 5 storey apartment building.

 

Officers from Worcestershire County Council (WCC), Highways Authority responded to questions from the Committee with regards to creating a potential ‘rat run’ through the development.  Officers explained that the applicant had undertook to introduce some additional traffic modelling on the site regarding connectivity.  The benefits of the revised proposed internal layout of the sight would outweigh any disbenefits.

 

Officers from WCC Highways further clarified that the speed limit within the proposed development would be 20 mph.  Should the application be approved and when the road network came forward, under Section 38 Highways adoption agreement, further traffic calming and various other matters could be implemented to control traffic, post planning.

 

Councillor S. P. Douglas also raised some queries, as to whether the flat roof of the proposed apartment block would be sustainable, a green roof or have solar panels.

 

In response to questions from Members, officers clarified that Proposal H2 of the LAAP required a target of 35% of dwellings to be affordable. 

 

Members debated the benefits of discussing and determining Application 19/01152/FUL.

 

Officers highlighted that whilst some of the dwellings on Application 19/01152/FUL, had direct access off Groveley Lane; some of the dwellings relied on the infrastructure of the Reserved Matters Application 19/01153/REM for vehicle access to those dwellings.  However, each application had to be determined on its own merits.

 

Members were still of the view that a 5 storey apartment building would be detrimental to the local area.  The proposed building was wrongly positioned and contravened the Neighbourhood Development Plan.  A 5 storey apartment building would be harmful to local residents and was out of character for the Groveley Lane area.

 

Officers responded to the Council’s Legal Officer when asked if there was an opportunity for further negotiations on the design of the Reserved Matters application, should Members be minded to defer the application, in order for the applicant to reconsider the scheme and to address their concerns. 

 

Following further discussion, Members also referred to the concerns raised by the public speakers, speaking in objection to the application. 

 

Having being put to the vote, an alternative recommendation was agreed to defer the application, to enable the applicant to reconsider the proposed development in order the address the concerns raised by the Committee; namely, that the proposed development was out of character for Groveley Lane and would be detrimental to the local area. Harm would occur due to the sighting and massing of the structure.  The 5 storey apartment building would be overpowering and, in their opinion, was wrongly positioned.  It also contravened  H1.3 of the Neighbourhood Development Plan.

 

Therefore it was

 

RESOLVED that the application be deferred, to a future meeting of the Planning Committee, in order for officers to liaise with the applicant, as detailed in the preamble above. 

Supporting documents: