Agenda item

To determine a full planning application from Bellway Homes Ltd (North East) and Banks Property Ltd for the phased construction of 539 residential dwellings with means of access, landscaping, open space, sustainable drainage, public rights of way diversion and associated infrastructure.

The Committee considered a report from the planning officers together with an addendum circulated in advance of the meeting, in relation to a full planning application submitted by Bellway Homes Ltd (North East) and Banks Property Ltd for the phased construction of 539 residential dwellings with means of access, landscaping, open space, sustainable drainage, public rights of way diversion and associated infrastructure on land at Killingworth Moor, Killingworth Lane, Killingworth, Newcastle upon Tyne.

The planning officer presented details of the application with the aid of various maps, plans and photographs.

In the absence of Councillor Jamieson Mr S Bolton read out the statement which she would have given had she been able to attend the meeting. She made reference to the lack of supporting infrastructure and the failure to guarantee that the infrastructure would be put in place if the development was not completed.  She also referred to concerns in relation to traffic and in particular the junction between Killingworth Road and Great Lime Road.  She explained that traffic was already heavy on Great Lime Road and it was not unusual at peak times for traffic to have to queue for long periods. She also explained that the junction at Killingworth Road was already unsafe due to its layout.  It was also close to a primary school and a large number of children crossed the road at that junction.  She suggested that the application be deferred to allow a full assessment of the safety of the Killingworth Road/Great Lime Road/Station Road junctions to be carried out and plans put in place to provide a solution to the concerns raised.

In accordance with the Committee’s Speaking Rights Scheme Mr S Bolton was permitted to address the Committee in relation to his representation.  He referred to the masterplan and the need for the provision of 25% affordable housing on the site and the need for proper access roads to address police concerns in relation to rat running traffic.  He suggested that the traffic assessment was flawed, that schools in the area were full and the infrastructure was failing.  He questioned how 3000 new homes within a one-mile radius could be provided without the appropriate infrastructure being put in place.  He referred to the loss of biodiversity and suggested that the flood risk had not been assessed correctly.  He also made reference to the large number of objections to the application.  He also stated that, due to the layout of the site, there would be many properties overlooking his home, leading to a loss of privacy and amenity.

Mr A Baty also addressed the Committee in relation to his concerns about the application.  He explained that he represented a number of residents of his street.  He suggested that North Tyneside was currently over populated.  He explained that the existing road network could not cope with the current traffic levels and he also referred to smells and poison from existing traffic levels.  He suggested that the application should be refused or at least scaled down.  He referred to existing villages being surrounded and there is a loss of green spaces for residents.  He also suggested that future housing should be built on brownfield sites.

Ms S Taverner, representing the Killingworth Village Residents’ Association, questioned whether the development was needed and, if so, why there was no affordable housing provided.  She also referred to the arboricultural impact assessment which she said was up to 6 years out of date.  Reference was also made to the existing traffic flows and bus gates.  She also explained that the house space standards were not being met as some of the proposed bedrooms were not of sufficient size to be classed as a bedroom.

Mr C Allan also addressed the Committee.  He referred to the additional traffic which would be generated by the development and suggested that the data provided a different picture of the impact, especially on the Killingworth/Great Lime Road junction.  The additional traffic would also be responsible for an increase in air pollution.  He also suggested that the development would result in increased congestion, noise and air pollution.

Ms S Manson of Pegasus Group, on behalf of the applicant, said that for the past 20 years Killingworth Moor had been a site identified for housing, it was allocated as housing land and the Authority has a housing supply shortfall.  She suggested that the working population of the borough was decreasing due to the lack of housing to buy.  It was explained that there was a strong prospect of 15% affordable housing being delivered all homes would be NDSS compliant. 

Members of the Committee asked questions of the speakers and officers and made comments.  In doing so the Committee gave particular consideration to:

a)       The viability of the site in relation to the provision of affordable housing and whether the viability assessment had been analysed by the authority;

b)       Traffic movements around the site and on the external highway;

c)        Transport assessments;

d)       Section 106 agreements;

e)        The infrastructure currently in place and further infrastructure needed;

f)         The status of the landscaping buffer zone; and

g)       The size of rooms within the development and whether they met the required standards.

It was moved and seconded that the Committee adjourn consideration of the application for 2 weeks to allow planning officers and the developers to explore the provision of 25% affordable housing.

On being put to the vote, 4 members voted for the recommendation and 7 voted against

The Chair then proposed acceptance of the planning officer’s recommendation.

On being put to the vote, 7 members voted for the recommendation and 1 voted against the recommendation with 3 abstentions.

Resolved that:

The Committee indicated that it is minded to grant the application; and

The Director of Regeneration and Economic Development be authorised to issue a notice of grant of planning permission subject to:

The conditions set out in the planning officer’s report and any subsequent addendums and the addition, omission or amendment of any other conditions considered necessary by the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development; and

Completion of a legal agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a financial contribution for the following:

-       Primary education £932,250

-       Equipped Playspace £194,579

-       Ecology and biodiversity £105,105

-       Sports pitch £173,828

-       Built sports £214,269

-       Employment and Training £126,880

-       Sustainable transport £1,177,076

-       Coastal mitigation £81,389.  This contribution complies with the requirements derived from the Coastal Mitigation SPD.

-       Travel Plan Sum £150,000.  This complies with the requirements derived from the Transport and Highways SPD.

-       £1,000 per year for travel plan monitoring until 5 years after final occupation in accordance with North Tyneside Travel Plan guidance.

-       Asda Junction £72,500 towards upgrading this junction.

-       Clousden Hill Junction - £196,000 towards upgrading this junction

The Head of Law and Monitoring Officer and the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development are authorised to undertake all necessary procedures (Section 278 Agreement) to secure the following highway improvements:

-       Site Access – Great Lime Road

-       Wheatsheaf roundabout

The Head of Law and Monitoring Officer be authorised to undertake all necessary procedures to obtain the diversion and extinguishment of existing rights of way and footpaths necessary to facilitate the development under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

(Reasons for decision: The Committee concluded that, having regard to the relevant policies contained in the Council’s Local Plan 2017 and National Planning Policy Framework, the proposed development was acceptable in terms of the principle of development and its impact on the character and appearance of the area, residential amenity and highway safety.)