Agenda item

18.02302.F - Land bounded Winterstoke Road

Minutes:

The representative of the Head of Development Management made the following points by way of introduction:

a.      That the application is for the creation of a mixed development of 67 residential dwellings, with landscaping and parking and associated works; on the former site of Kellaway Building Suppliers and Winterstoke garage land.

b.      The development will deliver 100% affordable Housing managed by United Communities Housing Association.

c.      The site is accessed from Luckwell Road and Winterstoke Road via a private access lane to the Winterstoke Centre, also Lynwood Road which is a no through road providing access to site and current Winterstoke Centre loading bay.

d.      The public consultation has resulted in a number of issues but the prominent issue concerned the shared access & loading bay area between the residential development and the Winterstoke Centre.

e.      The report addresses the issues brought to the attention of planning but clarification was provided by Transport Development Management, that the Winterstoke Centre has a right of access;  a unrestricted right to wait to load and unload but this does not include a right to park.  This right of access will be retained as part of the application and the existing Winterstoke Centre loading bay improved and extended. The land however will not be adopted by the Council as a consequence the two parties, that is the Developer and the Winterstoke Centre will need to negotiate a way forward as the issues are deemed to be a private law matter.

f.       Officers were recommending approval with the Conditions outlined and the section 106 settlement.

Members questions for Clarification

g.      Clarification was sought on the bus stop on Marsh lane;  the bus stop because of its location could not facilitate the installation of a shelter because of the potential loss of land on the development and therefore would not have real time information displayed.  Members queried this, citing a number of bus stops without shelters throughout the City that did have real time information with a new bus shelter.   Officers confirmed that they would look into this.

h.      Question was asked on whether committee could condition the way a large lorry accessed the loading bay at the Winterstoke Centre.  The Highways Officer confirmed that there is a right of access and a right to load and unload but no conditions were possible.

i.       Members queried the use of private contractors to collect the waste; the on cost to residents of the affordable housing development;  Committee were advised that Bristol Waste did not collect refuse and recycling from an unadopted highway.

Member Debate

j.       Cllr Stevens: noted that unload and loading at the Winterstoke Centre may require a vehicle to be on the access road for up to 3 hours. 

k.      Cllr Eddy: Considered the development positively as it delivered 100% affordable housing which was unique as some development failed to deliver the required 20%.  The development was in a sustainable location; good bus and cycle route; no negative impact on existing residential properties; only one issue to cause concern was that of the loading bay access for the Winterstoke Centre and noted that it was civil issue and not a matter for planning committee to address.

l.       Cllr M Davies:  Considered the development a good one delivering 100% affordable housing and having heard the public forum noted there were no reasons not to vote in support.

m.    Cllr Mead: Considered the application good; noted the legal advice and the differing position taken by the opposing sides; the issues could have been resolved over the preceding months; supported the application.

n.      Cllr Breckels: Liked the scheme and considered the 100% delivery of affordable housing a jackpot win; that he supported the right of the tenants of the Winterstoke Centre to continue in business; wondered if anything could be done to the pavement area along the access road to satisfy all parties.

o.     Chair advised that it was not possible to condition any such work.

p.      Cllr Eddy: sought to add to his view, the need for investigations to be done on implementing a real-time option for the bus stop.

q.      Officer advised that this could be explored further via the section 106 agreement.

r.       Cllr Stevens: Considered that with consent of the application the parties involved would need to negotiate to resolve any outstanding issues.

s.      Cllr Stevens proposed that committee agree the Officers recommendation, seconded by Cllr Eddy. 

t.       On being put to the vote

Resolved (11 for and 0 against, unanimous) that the application be granted subject to the conditions

 

Supporting documents: