development control board agenda - Borough Council of King's ...

Architectural Liaison Officer (ALO), who raises no objection but identifies certain areas for
improvement should Secure by Design accreditation be pursued. The site has constraints
given the design brief requirements for connectivity of the existing cycle/footpath network.
These conflicting requirements may result in Secure by Design not being fully achieved, but
a balance has to be struck in terms of practicality and other requirements (e.g. links to play
areas). Improved surveillance is achieved along both footpaths and cycle path and the
parking areas are considered to be adequately overlooked from gable windows. Lighting of
parking areas and footpaths/cycleways can be conditioned.
Building for Life
The proposal is now rated as achieving a score of 16 using the ‘Building for Life’ criteria.
This equates to ‘very good’ and the scheme scores especially well in relation to community
issues and sustainability, aiming to achieve Code 3 sustainable homes.
Other material considerations
Queries have been raised about the lack of infrastructure provision and contributions from
this development. However, the size of the development is under the threshold limit for
requiring County contributions towards education and library books. The same applies to the
provision of play areas.
Noise and disturbance during clearing and construction works are usually covered by S.60 &
61 of the Control of Pollution Act 1974 and the British Code of Practice BS5228:1984, and
falls within the remit of Environmental Health rather than Planning Control. However in some
circumstances conditions controlling this in some way can be attached, although
consultation with Environmental Health has indicated that control by condition is not
necessary in this case as the sites lie within an existing estate where building operations
would not be unexpected. An informative may be attached to any consent.
It has been alleged by objectors that the trees and bushes on the site are a haven for
wildlife. An ecological survey has been undertaken in response to these concerns and it has
been found that the trees and bushes do not provide a roost for bats, and if they are present
in the area they will be merely foraging. The trees and bushes on the scrubland are not
protected, and their removal is acceptable. Structured landscaping can be accommodated
within the new development to mitigate any loss along with the recommendations of a report
undertaken by Norfolk Wildlife Services. This may be controlled via condition.
With regards to reported surface water drainage problems, the IDB have raised no objection
to the proposal subject to the indicated soakaway system being adequate to serve the
development. Should that method change to a positive piped system then full details would
have to be agreed with the IDB given recent problems in the town. Anglian Water Services
Ltd indicates adequate capacity in the foul water sewer to serve the scheme.
Members will be aware that the impact of development on property values, either increases
or decreases, is not a material planning consideration.
CONCLUSION
The principle of housing is fully acceptable in this urban location. This area of land forms the
remaining part of affordable housing always envisaged for the adjacent estate. The modified
details submitted as part of this full application are now considered to be acceptable when
judged against the Development Plan, Central Government guidance and other material
considerations, and are considered to address the previous objections to the scheme. It is
09/00558/FM Development Control Board
6 th July 2009