Agenda item

Site Visit – 11.00am – 11.15am

The Committee considered the report of the Business Manager Growth & Regeneration, following a site inspection, which sought 99 new dwellings with associated access, earthworks and other ancillary and enabling works.

A schedule of communication was tabled at the meeting which detailed correspondence received after the Agenda was published from Nottinghamshire County Council Highways.

The Schedule of Communication asked for the amendment of Condition 21 to read:

Prior to the commencement of any development above slab level the Highway works as shown for indicative purposes only on drawing SK006-2B shall be substantially completed.  The works will need to be agreed and implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highways Authority.

Reason: To provide adequate & safe access to the site.

The implications of the need for the TRO towards the junction in terms of the impact on existing businesses and available parking provision weighs negatively in the overall planning balance.

Councillor Bill Bates representing Blidworth Parish Council spoke against the application in accordance with the views of Blidworth Parish Council as contained within the report.

Members considered the application and it was commented that the report indicated that this site in 2010 was unsuitable for the SHLAA, it was questioned why the site was now suitable.  The Lane leading up to the development also raised concern as Blidworth did not have a car park and visitors to the shops parked on this road side which made the Lane very narrow and busy.  It was felt that if car parking was restricted within this area the shops would not survive. It was also commented that Cycle Route 6 went up the Lane.  It was felt that there were other areas of land within Blidworth that were more suitable, without spoiling a beautiful green area.  It was further commented that whilst the acreage of the site may be sufficient to take 99 dwellings, the topography of the site was not adequate.  The proposed layout of the bungalows adjacent to the bungalows on Marklew Close was considered inappropriate due to the land levels on the site.  The arrangement for car parking on the estate was also considered inappropriate, as residents would park on the road side if their parking space was not next to their property.   The public footpath which was reported to be well used had been re-routed and previously led to a recreational area in the village.  There were no safety measures for children in that area and no play area on that site.  The public transport within Blidworth was a limited service terminating at 6pm.  Members further questioned who would maintain the green sink hole/drainage area in the centre of the site and the buffer between the bungalows on Marklew Close.

A Member commented that whilst this site was an allocated site, the principle had been established and accepted through the Core Strategy, the detail before the Committee was not acceptable and was not sustainable.

The Business Manager Growth & Regeneration confirmed that the traffic regulation order was a separate process with Nottinghamshire County Council and in the event that the committee were minded to approve, that process had to be completed before commencement of the development in accordance with a recommended condition.

AGREED           (unanimously) that contrary to Officer recommendation full planning                    permission be refused for the following reasons:

                        Notwithstanding the site being allocated for development, the                               proposals advanced represent a heavily compromised scheme, the                various elements of which would have an unacceptable cumulative                   impact, representing an unsustainable form of development which                        tips a balance determinatively in planning terms.

                        Those compromises are the lack of ability to meet required developer                  contributions, detrimental impacts on neighbouring residential                             amenity (to properties on Marklew Close), a poor layout and design                       and negative impacts upon the highway network.

In accordance with paragraph 12.5 of the Planning Protocol, as the motion was against Officer recommendation, a recorded vote was taken.