Agenda item

Application proposal: Outline application for mixed development comprising residential development of up to 295 dwellings, provision of a floodlit full size football pitch, unlit full size training pitch and community sports pitch with associated multi use clubhouse, spectator facilities and vehicular parking area; hub for local neighbourhood facilities and other community uses, public open space, landscaping, drainage and other facilities; associated vehicular and pedestrian accesses, land regrading, associated infrastructure and engineering works.

The Agency Planner updated the report and advised that Condition 1 required an amendment to make reference to the application being outline.  He also proposed amendments to Conditions 29 and 30 to include an implementation and retention clause.  The S106 agreement also required an amendment to include the management of public open space.

The Agency Planner presented the application.  He explained that the proposal was an outline application and the site was located on the northern side of Chard although the site was located within the parish of Combe St Nicholas.  The site was mixed agricultural use comprising 23.1 hectares and Crimchard Road was located along the western boundary with the hamlet of Cuttifords Door to the north.  Members were shown the indicative layout and informed that the means of access was for detailed consideration and would be taken from Thorndun Park Drive.  The proposal sought permission for up to 295 dwellings, 3 football pitches, leisure facilities and open space.  The main football pitch would be at the heart of the proposal. 

The Agency Planner explained that a similar application was submitted in 2012 which was refused and dismissed at appeal on material consideration.  He highlighted the summary of appeal on the Inspector’s decision.  The Agency Planner outlined the key considerations which related to: Outline Application – Access for consideration, Principle of Development, Highways, Landscape, Ecology, Flooding, and Chard Town Football Club.

The Agency Planner reiterated that the application was for outline permission with all matters except for access shown indicatively to be determined at a later stage within the detailed reserved matters application.  The site was located outside of the development area for Chard however as the Council could not demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply, applications should be considered in the context of presumption in favour of sustainable development and applications should be granted unless any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. 

Members were informed that Highways considered the proposal to be acceptable subject to further work being carried out on the Travel Plan which would be dealt with at the reserved matters stage.  The Council’s Ecologist had requested further mitigation measures which could be adequately achieved at the reserved matters stage.

The Agency Planner’s recommendation was for approval subject to conditions and a S106 agreement.

Members raised questions in relation to the following:

·         Consideration of the cumulative effect on the surrounding area

·         The exact location of the access to the site

·         Definition of a Haul Road

·         Emergency access arrangements onto Crimchard

·         Impact on the Convent Link Junction

·         Queried whether the access to the site was from a feeder road from Thorndun Park Drive by Bartletts Garage 

·         Highlighted that the configuration of the road was different to the access shown on the Officers presentation and the slides presented were not considered to be accurate.

·         Detailed access plans were normally submitted with the application at outline stage.

At this point in the proceedings, the meeting was adjourned in order for officers to obtain the relevant information requested by members including the detailed access plan.

When the meeting was reconvened, the Ward Members indicated that they were unhappy to proceed with consideration of the application as the access pictures of the site were out of date and one of the main issues to be considered as part of the outline application was highways and the access.

In response to a member comment made regarding the cumulative impact of this site and the Land East of Crimchard site, the Specialist – Legal reiterated that each application should be looked at and considered on its own merits.  Other permissions may have an impact but members would have to weigh in the balance of that impact and material considerations.

As members felt that this application was closely linked to Planning Application No.19/00074/FUL** - Land East of Crimchard, it was suggested that both applications should not be considered.

It was proposed and seconded to defer the application as members did not have sufficient information on the access arrangements to make an informed decision due to the slides and information presented not being up to date.

A vote was taken and it was unanimously approved to defer the application.