Agenda and minutes
Venue: Hollybank Room, Public Service Plaza, Civic Centre Road, Havant, Hants PO9 2AX. View directions
Contact: Jack Caine Democratic Services Officer
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies and Deputy Members To record the names of apologies given and Deputy Members who are attending the meeting in place of appointed Members. Minutes: Apologies received from Cllr Clear, Cllr Keast and Cllr Buckley with Cllr Izzard, Guest and Quantrill as deputies.
|
|
Declarations of Interests To receive any disclosure of interests from members and officers in matters to be discussed Minutes: There were no delcarations of interest from members present relating to matters on the agenda.
|
|
To approve the minutes of the Joint West of Waterlooville Major Development Planning Committee held on 9 January 2017. Minutes: RESOLVED that the Minutes of the last meeting of the Joint West Waterlooville Major Development Area Planning Committee held on the 9th January 2017 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
|
|
Proposal: Berewood Phase 13a: Reserved Matters Application comprising 73 residential dwellings, associated amenity space, access, garages, parking, internal roads, pathways and associated landscaping. (Matters of layout, appearance, access, landscape and scale pursuant to application ref: 10/02862/OUT). Discharge of conditions 3, 6(ii) a) b), c), d), e), f), h), i), j), k) I) m) n), 14 and 18.
Parish: Southwick And Widley Parish and Southwick and Wickham Ward.
Minutes: Proposal: Berewood Phase 13a: Reserved Matters Application comprising 73 residential dwellings, associated amenity space, access, garages, parking, internal roads, pathways and associated landscaping. (Matters of layout, appearance, access, landscape and scale pursuant to application ref:10/02862/OUT). Discharge of conditions 3, 6(ii) a) b), c), d), e), f), h), i), j), k) l) m) n), 14 and 18.
Parish: Southwick and Widley Parish and Southwick and Wickham Ward.
The committee considered the written report from the Head of Planning and the recommendation to grant permission.
Following questions from the Committee, officers advised the following:
·
The s106 agreement would cover issues relating to
infrastructure provisions for the local area. A briefing note on
infrastructure issues would be delivered at the next Forum meeting
to address these concerns.
·
It was in the officers’ opinion that the
proposal made best use of space available on the development site
and the density of the proposal was acceptable.
·
The open space provisions contained within the
proposal were acceptable and allowed the development to remain
viable.
·
The Affordable housing contributions were acceptable
with a sympathetic spread across the development site.
·
A balanced negotiation had taken place regarding the
design and layout of the proposal, allowing for the development to
be in line with the Design Code whilst remaining marketable for the
developer.
·
All open green spaces would be maintained by a
private management company and there would be some time before this
responsibility was moved to a Parish Council.
·
It was the intention for the garages to be used to
house vehicles when not in use and any material changes of use to
garages would require planning consent. Suitably worded conditions
were included in the Officer’s recommendation to address
communal parking areas. The committee was then addressed by the following deputees:
1.
Ms Amy Ashby, who objected to the Officer’s
recommendation for the following reasons:
a.
The proposal sought to remove a significant amount
of open space adjacent to an already existing development, which
would have a significant detrimental effect on local
residents.
b.
There was insufficient buffer space between this
development and adjacent developments. Buffer space was important
as it maintained social and ecological well
being.
c.
The proposal would have a negative impact on local
wildlife by way of it’s layout and design.
2.
Cllr J Watson, who objected to the Officer’s
recommendation for the following reasons:
a.
There was a significant number of public objections
to the application.
b.
The proposal was a significant departure from the
originally submitted plans by way of its density, layout and
design.
c.
The density of the proposal raised significant
concerns over future developments and higher density
proposals.
d.
The northern aspect of the development site was
originally proposed as green open space. This was now proposed to
be developed.
3.
Cllr Cutler, who objected to the Officer’s
recommendation for the following reasons: a. Both Parish and Ward Councillors had worked hard to develop a sense of community for the new developments in the local area. ... view the full minutes text for item 9. |