Decision details

Application for erection of 60 dwellings including engineering infill operation and associated works.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that the application be approved and officer advice in relation to the outline planning permission that already existed on the site for residential development and infilling of the pit and associated matters that had been considered by the inspector at appeal, some members felt that they could not support the application. Councillor Hodgkins, seconded by Councillor Kirby, proposed that the application be refused for the following reasons:

“The development, by virtue of its layout, would create parking arrangements and areas of hardstanding that would not be conducive for residents to park or have deficiencies which would lead to the displacement of parking on the street, creating an unattractive streetscene that would be detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers. The development would also create areas of public open space which have no natural surveillance. The development is therefore overdevelopment, it would not function well over the lifetime of the development, would not create high quality streetscenes in which to live, nor design out crime. The development is therefore contrary to paragraph 58 of the NPPF and DM10 of the SADMP July 2016.”

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – permission be refused on the grounds that the development, by virtue of its layout, would create parking arrangements and areas of hardstanding that would not be conducive for residents to park or have deficiencies which would lead to the displacement of parking on the street, creating an unattractive streetscene that would be detrimental to the amenities of future occupiers. The development would also create areas of public open space which have no natural surveillance. The development is therefore overdevelopment, it would not function well over the lifetime of the development, would not create high quality streetscenes in which to live, nor design out crime. The development is therefore contrary to paragraph 58 of the NPPF and DM10 of the SADMP July 2016.