Agenda item

Delegated conditional approval + Section 106 Agreement

The Major Projects Team Leader presented the report and plans of the proposed development.  An update note had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting in respect of the following matters:

 

·        Four additional representations had been received from one member of the public, relating to construction traffic and HGV access along Hempstead Road, the need for a new access from Heath Farm, parking for construction workers, and a request to update the Committee with outstanding comments and provide further information regarding the construction, access and parking conditions. 

 

Officer responses had been provided in the update note.  Most issues were already addressed in the Officer report and a condition added in respect of construction workers’ parking.

 

·        An updated position statement from Holt Town Council, reiterating its concerns in respect of highway safety and traffic movements, requested conditions relating to parking restrictions along Hempstead Road and construction traffic, and for the site to be accessed only from Heath Farm.

·        Additional conditions to be included in the Officer’s recommendation.

 

The Major Projects Team Leader recommended delegated approval of this application as set out in the report and amended by the following additional summarised conditions:

 

·        Construction Management Plan (materials storage, amenity protection etc.)

·        Construction vehicle access route

·        Construction parking with a phasing plan

·        Construction Site Exclusion Zone detail around the Buffer Area and Open Space

·        Cycle parking details for the flats (to be secure and covered)

·        Arboricultural Impact Assessment for the recently retained tree T11

·        Pumping station landscape scheme

·        Noise protection measures for Plot 1 (road junction and industrial noise).

 

Public Speaker

 

Chris Smith (supporting)

 

Holt Town Council had submitted a statement that had been circulated to all Members of the Committee prior to the meeting.

 

The Head of Planning reported that Councillor D Baker, a local Member, was unable to attend the meeting but had no further comments to add.

 

Councillor Mrs G Perry-Warnes stated that she was speaking on behalf of residents who lived on or near Hempstead Road, and with the support of Councillor Baker.  She was concerned that the impact of another junction opening onto Hempstead Road, near to a notorious pinch point, had been discounted by the Highway Authority.  She welcomed the affordable housing provision and did not oppose the application, but was disappointed that a previously promised new access from Heath Farm had not been forthcoming.  She urged the Committee to listen to the concerns of local residents and requested that the strongest conditions be applied to the permission to mitigate its impact on them.  She requested conditions relating to the following matters, some of which had been included in the recent amendments:

 

1.     That all construction vehicles, (HGV and staff) are required to avoid the built up area around the pinch point on Hempstead Road and that it should be enforced as anecdotal evidence is that some of the restrictions are not being complied with.  

2.     A suitable place to be provided on site for parking, deliveries and unloading. 

3.     The land at the side and rear of 65 Hempstead Road should not be used for site access during construction, and

4.     Parking restrictions on Hempstead Road, eg. double yellow lines, and if appropriate, parking controls on nearby residential roads which were likely to be used for parking by construction workers.

 

Councillor Mrs Perry-Warnes requested that the conditions were regularly monitored for compliance and enforced.  She stated that the traffic problems on Hempstead Road had been an ongoing source of misery and anything that could be done to reduce the impact of the proposed development would be greatly appreciated.

 

Councillor A Brown shared the Ward Members’ concerns regarding vehicular access to the site.  He was disappointed that there was no provision for breakout access into Heath Farm and considered that residents on Hempstead Road would experience considerable inconvenience during the construction period.  He referred to the housing strategy contribution and asked if there were prospects of increasing the percentage of adaptable dwellings from 8% to 20% as required by policy, given that North Norfolk had the most elderly demographic in the country.  He asked if the nearby Lovell development had achieved the 20% benchmark.

 

Councillor N Pearce shared the concerns regarding traffic and stated that Hempstead Road was very busy even outside the school run, and that the existing pinch point was difficult to navigate.  He asked if the highway issues could be reviewed.  He asked how likely it was that the full 44% affordable housing provision would be delivered.

 

Councillor A Yiasimi also expressed concerns with regard to the pinch point.

 

The Chairman stated that she had visited the site some years previously and there had been a problem with parking on Hempstead Road at that time.  The Town Council had requested parking restrictions.

 

Councillor C Cushing asked if there were guarantees that the concerns expressed by Councillor Mrs Perry-Warnes and Councillor Brown would be addressed.

 

The Officers responded to the issues that had been raised by Members.

 

The Head of Planning explained that there was a requirement in the report for a Construction Management Plan, which could be enforced through planning controls and conditions.  However, there was a wider issue regarding access onto the local network associated with the construction phase and operational traffic flowing from the residential network.  Whilst the Construction Management Plan could be used where appropriate, the Norfolk County Council Highways Team and the Police powers would be the most direct route to enforcement through their primary legislation.

 

The Major Projects Team Leader explained that the possibility of parking restrictions along Hempstead Road had been discussed with NCC Highways Officers.  They considered that the development would be able to provide all its parking needs within the site.  It would not be reasonable to require a Traffic Regulation Order along Hempstead Road as the development would not be expected to give rise to parking along it.  Concerns regarding access next to 65 Hempstead Road could be addressed through the construction access routing condition.

 

The scheme now provided for 10 out of the 52 dwellings to be wheelchair accessible, which met the 20% policy requirement.  The layout plan indicated where those dwellings would be sited and a planning condition would ensure that details included the necessary accessibility features. 

 

Whilst 44% affordable dwellings were proposed at this stage, planning legislation allowed the applicant to request renegotiation of the figure within 5 years, or to apply to the Secretary of State for a variation after that period.

 

Councillor Brown asked if the Government’s relaxation of construction working hours on Sundays during the pandemic would affect the management condition on the site.

 

The Head of Planning explained that local authorities were required to be flexible around the issue of construction working hours during the pandemic.  He stated that a direct approach from the developers would be welcome as to how much flexibility would be required if a start were to be made on the site within the pandemic period.  The site was within a very sensitive residential environment and there were a number of issues that required consideration.  If construction did not commence until after the end of the pandemic it was likely that these provisions would have been closed and the imposed conditions would apply.

 

The Principal Lawyer added that the relaxations regarding construction hours were time limited and it was hopeful that ordinary conditions could be enforced given the roll out of the vaccination programme

 

It was proposed by Councillor P Heinrich, seconded by Councillor R Kershaw and

 

RESOLVED unanimously

 

That the Head of Planning be authorised to approve this application as set out in the report and amended by the following additional conditions (summarised):

 

·        Construction Management Plan (materials storage, amenity protection etc.)

·        Construction vehicle access route

·        Construction parking with a phasing plan

·        Construction Site Exclusion Zone detail around the Buffer Area and Open Space

·        Cycle parking details for the flats (to be secure and covered)

·        Arboricultural Impact Assessment for the recently retained tree T11

·        Pumping station landscape scheme

·        Noise protection measures for Plot 1 (road junction and industrial noise).

 

The Chairman stated that the Major Projects Team Leader was leaving the Authority at the end of December to take promotion at Great Yarmouth Borough Council.  She thanked him for his work and wished him well for the future.

 

The Major Projects Team Leader thanked the Chairman for her comments.  He stated that he also wished to acknowledge the work done on this scheme by Sarah Hinchcliffe, a former colleague, and to acknowledge the efforts of current and former Members on the Fakenham scheme.