Agenda item

Officers introduced this report and made the following points during their presentation:

·       National policy gave a presumption in favour of housing development

·       The design had changed significantly from the original proposal

·       The elevation facing the Paintworks had been reduced in size in the current application and the number of units had also been reduced

·       Details of the car park area, storage area, refuse area and landscaping were all indicated

·       Details of the bus layby as requested by Transport Development Management and now included in the proposal were shown to the Committee

·       There was a good standard accommodation on the site

·       The level of affordable housing had been confirmed at 30%. However, it was noted that whilst 15% was funded through Section 106 agreement and could be legally enforced, the remainder would be provided through the Homes England Grant via the public purse

In response to members’ questions, officers made the following points:

·       There was no reason to believe that the developer would not be able to meet their commitments concerning affordable housing. Generally, the track record with these sorts of schemes was very good and developers did honour their commitments. However, the Committee should bear in mind that there were situations where the Housing Association changed their mind

·       The Flood Team had indicated that, following the agreement to provide a new sewer, they were prepared to support the application

·       Traffic The initial assessment of the number of vehicles passing would reduce as the scheme bedded down

·       Cycle Places – the total number had been confirmed with the developer up to 200 overall which was in compliance with the required policy

·       There were lots of potential sources of funding available to address any problems related to concerns about below standard lighting on the cycle path

·       The development was compliant with the Council’s Net Zero Development Target such as those requiring 26% carbon reduction and it was BREEAM compliant

·       There was only one density area which was in line with other developments in the area. The calculation took into account urban floor space

·       There were three principal options available to the Committee – accepting the existing proposal, deferring or approving it with a roll over concerning viability

·       The landowner issues remained difficult. Current vehicular access could be made outside the area indicated by the red line on the map

Committee members made the following comments:

·       This is the sort of brownfield site that the Committee should be supporting. The proposed level of affordable housing was good. The concerns relating to the density of the housing and transport had been met. This seemed an excellent scheme and should be approved with a condition of rolling viability previews. Other schemes submitted by Goram Homes had been approved

·       The advantages of the scheme were the heat network, the fact that it was on a brownfield site and that it improved existing bus transport. Therefore, it should be supported

·       Developers were urged to resolve their existing differences with the owners of the Paintworks site

·       Officers and members of the public were thanked for their comments. The application had previously been called in due to concerns about the lack of community space. However, it had significantly changed including a reduction in the number of units and in height and should therefore be supported

Councillor Eddy moved, seconded by Councillor Paul Goggin and upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED: (unanimously) – that the application is approved in accordance with the recommendation set out in the report including the required conditions.