Issue - meetings

Outline Application for the construction of 35 no. affordable residential dwellings for first time buyers and those looking to rent their first home (Paragraph 71 entry-level exception site), with all matters reserved other than access.

Refuse (against officer recommendation)

Miss Taylor presented the item to Members.

The Committee received the following speakers:

Roger Gowlett – Parish Council

Stephen Johnson – Objector

Jane Towers – Objector

Andrew Kerry-Bedell – Objector

Jeremy Higgins – Agent

Officers responded to Member’s comments and questions.  Miss Taylor confirmed that the site was listed in the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) as suitable for development.  With regards to applying the ‘tilted balance’ assessment within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), para11 referred to the application of decisions, and section d stated ‘any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole’, and therefore the entirety of the NPPF must be considered.  Miss Taylor also confirmed that officers were satisfied that the access to the field beyond the proposed development, was sufficient.

With regards to the proportion of houses within the Nutbourne East settlement boundary which were at market level and those which were affordable if the proposed 35 houses remained affordable, Miss Bell responded that officers did not currently have those figures, but added that housing officers had confirmed a need existed within the area for affordable housing for first time buyers. 

On the matter of reasons to refuse the recommendation not to contest the appeal, Mr Whitty confirmed Members had cited reasons which were grounded in material planning considerations.  With regards to the tilted balance, the consideration was whether the lack of a five year housing land supply would outweigh any parts of the NPPF guidance.  Officers acknowledged that the site did not meet the criteria with the NPPF for an Entry Level Exception Site (ELES) as it was 0.3 of a hectare larger that the policy set out and 2.2% larger in terms of the assessment against the settlement of Nutbourne East, but Mr Whitty advised that a Planning Inspector may plot the settlement boundary against how housing functioned rather a local authority drawn settlement boundary, but this could provide a valid reason against the tilted balance.  The NPPF set the threshold to ensure communities were not overwhelmed by exception sites but it would then be necessary to identify the concern within the policy and articulate the resultant harm or implications.

With regards to the field access, Mr Whitty confirmed officers were not aware of other access and currently the proposal appeared to be via the site, but iterated officers did not have concerns related to this.

Mr Whitty confirmed that nitrates which would feed into the harbour would be dealt with by way of off-setting, by taking an area used for cereal production out of use and then plant with woodland. Whilst the proposed mitigation land would be in Hampshire and would not run-off into the same tributary of Chichester Harbour as that of Thornham Waste Water Treatment Works, it nonetheless fed into the harbour as a whole and as such officers were satisfied that the impact would be mitigated.  With regards to recreational  ...  view the full minutes text for item 141