[Councillor Warr left the meeting during this item.]

2 Public Speakers

Philip Hailey – Objector

Dawn Appleton – Agent

Approval of reserved matters following outline consent WA/68/20/OUT for the construction of 131 No. dwellings (30% affordable homes) and amendment to boundary of garden land to serve adjoining property. This application may affect the setting of listed buildings, may affect the character and appearance of the Walberton Village Conservation Area and is in CIL Zone 3 and is CIL Liable as new dwellings.

At the beginning of this item, the Chair read out a statement to the Committee [which is provided here verbatim for the record]:

On Wednesday 23 November I received an e-mail from a Mr James Mallinson on behalf of the applicants for this item. On that day I was travelling to York. When I arrived in York at around 5pm I accessed my I-pad and noticed the message. Given the heading relating to a live planning application I did not open it. When I returned home on 27 November there was a message on my home answerphone received on 24 November from Mr Mallinson asking me to confirm that I had received the message. I did not respond. On Monday 28 November Mr Mallinson again telephoned on my home number and asked me to confirm that I had received and read his message on behalf of BDW. I told him that I was not prepared to confirm or deny that I had received or read his message and that I would seek further advice on the matter from the Monitoring Officer. This, therefore, is a brief summary of matters relating to this application and I am now confirming to this Committee, for the record and for transparency, that I did not read the content of the message from Mr Mallinson and that whatever its contents it has no bearing on my consideration of the application.

The Planning Area Team Leader then presented the report with updates. This was followed by 2 Public Speakers. Members then took part in a debate on the application where a number of points were raised, including that the application was won on appeal but that it did not meet the objectives of the Appeal Inspector as they had wanted bungalows along the southern boundary of the site and instead there were 2-storey dwellings, what constituted a bungalow, the need for single storey dwellings, the demographics that may use bungalows and whether there would be conflict with placing the play area in front of them, the suitability of the style and materials proposed for the location and the need for a consistent approach to quality across the development.

The Officer recommendation to approve conditionally was then proposed by Councillor Chapman and seconded by Councillor Warr. After a vote, the recommendation was declared NOT CARRIED.

The Chair noted that the meeting was nearly at its 3 hour limit unless an extension as per Part 5, Section 2, 8.1 of the Constitution was voted for.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 484