Agenda item

This was a reserved matters application for the erection of 600 dwellings. The development lay within the redline application boundary for the Lawley Sustainable Urban Extension. The site was previously used for mining works; there were a number of mineshafts still on the site, which required filling.

The application, which was Phase 11 of the Lawley Development, would provide 122 two-bed, 320 three-bed, 139 four-bed, and 19 five-bed units. No affordable housing units were proposed.

Members had received a written update on the proposed access to the site. A further 14 representations had been received, none of which raised any material considerations beyond those that had been addressed in the written update.

Discussions had been held with the steam railway to provide a play area on land by the railway. It was understood to have been agreed at the start of 2020; the Local Planning Authority had been notified that the Railway Trust no longer wished to accept the play area.

Members heard a number of representations from members of the public.

Councillor J Yorke, Parish Councillor, spoke against the application raising concerns over access to the development in relation to the need for the proposed estate roads to cross the restricted byway known as Ladygrove.

Councillor J Greenaway, Ward Councillor, spoke against the application raising a number of objections, including flooding, access, mining and impact on the steam railway.

Ms C Williams, a member of the public, spoke against the development raising concerns around the legality of the development and the ownership rights over Ladygrove. 

Mr C Wilson, the Applicant’s agent, spoke in favour of the application, and stated that the site was well planned and there had been no technical objections.

Approximately 195 public representations had been received concerning trees, highways, and built heritage, amongst other issues. The principle of development had been accepted for the site and outline consent had been granted.

Highway considerations had been determined at the outline stage and could not be revisited. The development provided car parking spaces in excess of that required by the Council. The Applicants had confirmed that the landowner of Ladygrove Lane had been identified and all access rights had been identified. This access issue was a civil matter. The attenuation ponds would improve overall drainage and existing flooding and run off issues.

The development was considered acceptable in reference to the impact on existing residents. Phase 11 would contribute 600 dwellings to the Borough’s housing supply, 10% of which would be affordable. The Applicants had liaised regularly with the public and had accommodated their desire to retain Martingale Circus. They had also volunteered to reduce construction hours in response to residents’ concerns and comments.

The Legal Advisor informed members that the Council did not have to question or investigate the ownership of Ladygrove. Planning authorities did not have to double check information provided by developers. Concerns over whether the developers had identified the correct landowner did not prevent members determining this application. Further, residents’ concerns over private rights were an issue for the developer and, again, were not an issue preventing the Committee from determining the application at this time. 

Public Restricted byway rights over Ladygrove Lane would remain; the developer did not propose to remove any rights. The public would not be prevented from using the byway. The design of the three crossing points for motorised vehicles would preserve the lane’s ongoing use as a restricted byway. No rights would be lost because of the creation of crossings. Regarding a suggestion from one of the public speakers that people crossing Ladygrove would be committing an offence, it was pointed out that the Applicants had said that they had identified the landowner who had given authority to cross the restricted byway in motorised vehicles.

Members posed a number of questions:

In response to a question, the planning officer confirmed that the most recent statement from the Coal Authority stated that they were satisfied by the development as submitted. The written update provided to Members contained additional information that showed risks had been investigated and addressed.

Members discussed the impact on the Steam Railway and it was confirmed that the developers would be providing enhancements for the railway as part of the scheme. The developer had a responsibility to deliver the scheme within the sites boundaries.

On being put to the vote, it was, unanimously:

RESOLVED – That delegated authority be granted to the Delivery Management Service Delivery Manager to grant reserved matters subject to:

a) No further representations being received during the consultation period to advertise that notice has been served on a landowner within the application site, which raise material considerations that are, in the opinion of the Development Management Service Delivery Manager after consultation with the Chair of Planning Committee, of such significance that the application should be reported back to Planning Committee for re-consideration and determination.

b) The Applicants entering into a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 legal agreement with the Council to provide 10% Affordable Homes on site as discounted market homes.

c) that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management  Service Delivery Manager to agree the conditions and informatives contained within the report and the update report (with authority to finalise conditions and reasons for approval to be delegated to Development Management Service Delivery Manager).