Agenda item

Full application for development of 57 Affordable Dwellings with associated access, open space and drainage at Land South of Wignals Gate, Holbeach, Spalding (report of the Development Manager enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Development Manager upon which the above application was to be determined, including their recommendations, copies of which had previously been circulated to all members.

Members debated the matter fully, with the following comments being raised:

• Concern was expressed that, whilst the benefits of affordable housing were recognised, a 100% affordable housing scheme conflicted with the principle of creating mixed and balanced communities. Reference was made to previous discussions on other schemes where concerns had been raised regarding the concentration of affordable housing.
• Concern was raised about the design and layout of the development, and that the scheme appeared to facilitate future expansion through roads terminating at the site boundaries without the support of a wider masterplan. It was also considered that the development failed to provide a sympathetic transition to the countryside, relying heavily on close-boarded fencing rather than softer landscaping measures.
• Further concerns were raised regarding the site entrance, which was viewed as lacking a clear focal point and being dominated by an attenuation basin, whilst drainage features were not considered to be fully integrated into the overall design.
• Concern was also expressed regarding the lack of a clear street hierarchy, the extensive use of hard surfacing and the presence of large parking courts with limited landscaping.
• It was raised that the proposal would fail to respect the character of Wignals Gate, fail to establish an appropriate rural edge and fail to deliver a high-quality design solution.
• It was suggested that, should planning permission be granted, additional conditions be imposed to secure enhanced landscaping throughout the site, including native hedgerows, additional tree planting, and landscaping within parking courts. Further improvements were requested in relation to hard surfacing proposals, the design and quality of open spaces, adequate bin storage provision and the implementation of a comprehensive lighting scheme to ensure both safety and visual amenity.
• Concerns were raised regarding the density of the development, estimated at approximately 13 dwellings per acre, and whether this reflected the character of surrounding development.
  • Officers confirmed that the development would have a gross density of approximately 34.5 dwellings per hectare.
• Concern was also expressed regarding the absence of contributions sought by the NHS and Lincolnshire County Council for education provision, with the view that any resulting funding gap would ultimately need to be met through public resources.
• Further concerns were raised that the density and scale of development appeared out of keeping with surrounding residential properties and that the proposal could result in a large estate adjoining existing housing and open countryside.
• Clarification was provided that the application site formed part of a wider reserve allocation with an indicative capacity of 70 dwellings. The allocation covered a larger area of land than the application site and had originally envisaged a mixed-tenure development.
• Concerns were raised regarding the future management and maintenance of the development, including open spaces, landscaping and communal areas. Questions were asked regarding the ability of the housing association to maintain standards over the long term.
  • Officers advised that housing associations had a vested interest in maintaining developments as long-term assets and are subject to regulatory oversight. It was also noted that wholly affordable housing schemes are relatively uncommon and that many developments instead seek reductions in affordable housing provision.
• Concerns were raised regarding the effectiveness of management companies and housing associations in maintaining landscaping and communal areas, together with requests for additional litter bins and suitable bin storage arrangements.
  • Officers assured the committee that the proposed housing association was a regulated registered provider with responsibilities for maintaining housing stock and communal areas and that local lettings policies would assist in achieving balanced communities.
• Concerns were also raised regarding the absence of renewable energy measures, including solar panels and air-source heat pumps, and the adequacy of parking provision.
• It was acknowledged that affordable housing need remained significant and that the success of such developments often depended on effective management arrangements. Support was expressed for stronger landscaping proposals, enhanced boundary treatments and improved arrangements for litter bins and waste storage.
  • Officers advised that planning conditions already required details of landscaping and hard and soft surfacing, although these could be strengthened if considered necessary. Additional requirements relating to bin storage could also be secured by condition.

The initial vote to approve the application was lost. Following further debate, a motion to defer the application for further discussions between officers and the developers on layout and design was tabled.

AGREED:

That the application be deferred for further discussions to take place between officers and the developer regarding the layout and design.

(Moved by Councillor Brewis, Seconded by Councillor T Sneath)

Oral representations were received in respect of the above application in line with the Council’s scheme of public speaking at Planning Committee meetings:

Supporter: Chris Lindley (Agent)