Agenda item

Money Hill Site North Of Wood Street Ashby De La Zouch Leicestershire

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report to Members.

Councillor R D Bayliss, Ward Member, addressed the Committee.  He stated that he could marginally accept the proposal for social housing provisions but his main concern was the access off the A511 and Woodcock Way, especially as the improvement to junction 13 of the A42 was yet to be resolved.  He stated that he understood that national policy influenced decisions made by the Committee and that Ashby was willing to take some of the burden for housing development but he stressed that it needed to be done under the Council’s terms.

Ms M Tuckey, Parish Councillor, addressed the Committee.  She reported that the Parish Council had discussed this development on five occasions, received two presentations from the developer and have objected each time the application had come to the Planning Committee.  She highlighted that the main concerns were traffic implications and the proposed drainage strategy.  She went on to list each time the application had been to the Planning Committee and how the Parish Council had objected.  She concluded that the Highways Authority recently conducted a two week traffic assessment in Ashby and the result was a five percent increase in traffic flow since September 2011, the increase in traffic from the proposed development would only cause a further increase.

Mr M Ball, objector, addressed the Committee.  He stated that the traffic levels through the town had increased in recent years due to businesses and new homes, and there were many accidents at the Grammar school.  He stressed that another link road out of the town was urgently needed but this had not been proposed in any of the conditions.  He added that he felt a full highway review should be undertaken as it was not appropriate to have the access to such a large development from the one island at the A511.  He also believed that the access from Woodcock Way should be ruled out all together.  He concluded that local residents had campaigned against the development from the start due to access concerns and asked Members to refuse the application.

Mr R Sutcliffe-Smith, agent, addressed the Committee.  He reported that the developer had tried to address all concerns raised by the local residents and had continued to engage with both local residents and officers.  He explained that the access on Woodcock Way had been restricted and the access from the A511 was achievable.  He concluded that there was an opportunity to create something special on the site and the proposed scheme was future proof.

Councillor G Jones asked for confirmation that the access on Woodcock Way could be restricted to 30 units as proposed.  The Head of Regeneration and Planning confirmed that this could be conditioned as part of the planning permission.

Councillor T Neilson commented that the development had now been discussed on a number of occasions and it had not really moved forward.  He stated that he was not against the development of the site in principle but the scheme needed to be right for Ashby.  He referred to condition five which mentioned a master plan for the whole of the site and asked for a definition of the whole of the site.  The Principal Planning Officer referred to the plan within the report and explained that the whole application site was outlined in red.

Councillor T Neilson commented that the developer had proposed highway contributions for Ashby but not specified what they would be used for.  He asked for further details as it was difficult to make a decision without anything in writing.  The Head of Regeneration and Planning reported that there were a number of offsite improvements proposed but the details had not yet been worked up.  Once the application had been approved in outline form the Section 106 contributions could be used to obtain specific plans.

Councillor J Bridges referred to condition 32 and asked if more specific wording could be used to restrict the Woodcock Way access to 30 units as it was currently very open.  After some discussion over the planning terms used and the preference to have clearer wording in layman’s terms, the Principal Planning Officer confirmed that more specific wording could be used as well as the condition requested by Councillor G Jones.

Councillor G A Allman reported that the Town Council still had major concerns and he felt that the application was still muddled with unresolved matters.  For those reasons he moved that the application be refused.  It was seconded by Councillor J G Coxon.  On the advice of the Head of Regeneration and Planning, it was agreed that the original reasons for refusal when the application was previously considered be used.

After further discussion regarding whether the proposed cul-de-sac off Woodcock Way should be removed as a reason to refuse as Members were happy with the condition to restrict the access, it was decided to leave it as one of the original reasons for refusal.

RESOLVED THAT:

The application be refused on the grounds of unacceptable access in terms of connections to the town centre and vehicular access to Woodcock Way, adverse impacts on the operation of Junction 13 of the A42 and the under provision of affordable housing.