Agenda item

The Chair welcomed everyone to the final meeting of presentations and advised Members that it was for information gathering purposes only and Members would not be making any decisions or indications about whether sites should be included in the draft Local Plan.  He reminded Members that each presentation would be 15 minutes with an additional 5 minutes for questions.  Any questions after 5 minutes would need to be forwarded to the Democratic Services Officer who would forward them to the relevant person for a response.  The questions and responses would be provided as a link in the minutes.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Seaton.

 

Iestyn John representing Clinton Devon Estates

 

Land at Clay Common, Seaton (Seat_09)

·         The site is on the western edge of Seaton and sits in line with existing dwellings;

·         It is in a small area of open land (paddock) with access via a properly laid road with wide visibility splays onto Beer Road;

·         To the west is a former quarry and is marked by a very dense area of woodland;

·         The site is visible from the surrounding area;

·         Opportunity for five dwellings with use of the existing access which does not need to be altered;

·         Existing trees and hedges to the north west of the site which can be retained;

·         The distance between dwellings are sufficiently separate within the landscape.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought on any constraints.  In response Mr John confirmed the land does fit within the Coastal Preservation Area and does not meet any of the landscape objectives by its location.  He advised it was not common land and was used as pasture;

o   Clarification sought on whether the land was considered back land development.  In response Mr John advised the development would be an extension of the settlement;

o   Clarification sought about how the development would remain in keeping with the houses in Beer Road.  Mr John acknowledged that the houses in Beer Road were very large with five + bedrooms and although they would look smaller in comparison they would have generous gardens;

o   Clarification sought about the large area bounded by houses on two sides.  Mr John advised it was not a formal area for recreational use.

 

Alan Sydenham, Herridge Property representing landowners

 

Land at Barnards Hill Lane, Seaton (Seat_02)

·         The land joins the existing built up area boundary of the town approximately 1 mile from the seafront in a central area close to facilities, GP surgery and primary school;

·         Proposal for approximately 60 dwellings with appropriate levels of affordable housing and public open space;

·         Existing houses along the southern and eastern boundaries;

·         The land slopes gently from north west to south east and is currently in agricultural use with established trees and hedges around the site which screen the site from adjoining houses;

·         The site is available and deliverable within a suitable timeframe;

·         Discussions undertaken about potential vehicle and pedestrian access with the possibility of a safe access onto Popular Tree Drive

·         There are regular bus services available from the site to Sidmouth and Exeter;

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought on the current proposed access for the site.  In response Mr Sydenham advised it was proposed to bring an access off the junction of Popular Tree Drive at the bottom southern corner of the site.  There is an existing T junction with ample room to create a new access with appropriate visibility;

o   Clarification sought about mitigation measures for the flooding issue from rainwater coming down from adjacent fields.  Mr Syndenham advised that it would be standard practice for any residential development to consider mitigation and could see no reason why the scheme could not be designed in a way to alleviate this.

o   Clarification sought about whether there were any access rights onto a public highway.  Mr Syndenham advised the existing highway had been adopted and that all parties were working together to create an appropriate access.

 

Richard Ayre & Graham Hutton, Baker Estates Ltd

 

Land either side of Harepath Road, Seaton (Seat_03 & Seat_05)

·         Proposal for approximately 130 houses to the east of Harepath Road;

·         50% houses and 50% bungalows with a good range of house types;

·         Proposal to bring forward commercial area to attract a good range of mixed uses;

·         Proposal for sports pitches on the western side of Harepath Road and open to suggestions to bring forward sports pitch enhancements.  It was suggested this could be brought forward with the use of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) money or other money available; 

·         There is also scope for development on the western parcel;

·         The site is outside the flood zone;

·         The main bat flight path goes to the north of the site with likely local bat movement from the north and south boundaries of the site;

·         Mitigation for bats to include buffers and enhancements along the northern and southern boundaries with the opportunity of enhancements.  Discussions needed with Natural England to adequately look after the bats;

·         Seat_03 proposed for residential;

·         Seat_05 proposed for commercial;

·         Land in one ownership making planning and delivery much more straightforward;

·         Landscaping at top of the hill to create a green backdrop;

·         Both east and west of Harepath Road should be allocated and planned comprehensively.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought about the mixed use for employment and housing and whether this would be on someone else’s land.  In response Mr Ayre advised they would look to facilitate the commercial land but it would not be in their control.  He advised on land owned by Bakes Estates they would look to deliver housing and recreational and environmental opportunities;

o   Clarification sought on the number of houses that would be delivered.  It was advised between 200 – 220 in total on both sides;

o   Clarification sought on the Biodiversity Net Gain.  Mr Ayre confirmed it would be achieved;

o   Clarification sought about the recreational space and whether there would be tree planting.  Mr Ayre confirmed that trees would be planted to create the green backdrop.  There would also be an opportunity for trees to be planted within streets as part of the development;

o   Clarification sought about what would happen to the green wedge if both allocations were to come forward.  Mr Ayre understood that the green wedge was important and advised they would introduce planting and screening along the northern boundary which would also serve the bats.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Budleigh Salterton

 

Simon Coles, Tetra Tech Planning & Giles Walker representing Wain Homes South West

 

Land in Budleigh Salterton (Budl_03)

·         No major infrastructure constraints to this site;

·         Drainage and services are already there;

·         Confident in delivering 50% affordable housing (policy compliant);

·         Benefit from  an hourly bus service and hospital provision;

·         Close to Exmouth and other shops and facilities;

·         The site is constrained to the south by the sea and to the east and west by the Coastal Protection Preservation Area as well as a green wedge protecting the settlements;

·         1.6 Ha. (4 acres);

·         The site is gently sloping and is contained by topography and vegetation;

·         Appropriate access/access-splay and overall limited challenges/abnormal costs;

·         It has a settlement edge character and separate from undeveloped land to the north and east with landscape screening;

·         Hedgerows will be retained, enhanced and buffered;

·         The site comprises habitats of low ecological importance;

·         Opportunity to deliver 10% Biodiversity Net Gain;

·         Habitat and protected species surveys to inform mitigation;

·         Proposal for 50 – 60 dwellings with a balance and range of house types and tenures with structured landscaping and pedestrian connections;

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought about the scheme to provide affordable homes.  In response Mr Walker advised typically it would be 70% affordable rent and 30% shared ownership and the delivery of 50% would be the current policy;

o   Clarification sought about collaboration to work with the development next to the site.  Mr Walker advised that a pedestrian foot link could be provided on the highway land to create a verge across the site and was yet to build a rapport with the other development;

o   Clarification sought about how the development would help the views considering it would be in an AONB area.  Mr Walker advised the site already had existing strong hedgerows and tree planting and would look to introduce buffers with wider hedgerows and native trees to reinforce the views from the east and north.

 

Iestyn John, representing Clinton Devon Estates

 

Land adjacent to Barn Lane, Budleigh Salterton (Budl_03)

·         It is a well contained single site with an urban edge character that sits within the wider development that has opportunities to link well with existing facilities and connections to surrounding footpath networks;

·         Proposal for 40 dwellings including affordable housing;

·         Contained within mature hedge lines;

·         Close to primary school and in easy reach of local facilities;

·         Opportunity of a footpath on the western side to connect into the footpath network to avoid Barn Lane.

 

Members raised the following questions:

·         Clarification sought about whether there had been discussions with Wain Homes about bringing a joint scheme between the two sites.  Mr John advised preliminary discussion had taken place but not in detail;

·         Clarification about the provision of affordable houses.  Mr John advised the landowners would look to comply with policy.

·         Clarification sought on cycling provision.  Mr John confirmed cycle parking had been included in the architectural design and suggested it would not be a problem to facilitate a connection into the bottom on the site to join the main road.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Lympstone.

 

David Seaton, PCL Planning Ltd representing Waddeton Park Ltd

 

Land at Courtlands Cross, Lympstone (Lymp_07)

·         The site  is an opportunity for both Lympstone and Exmouth that is well related to both settlements;

·         The site fronts the A376 which is the key transport route to and from Exeter;

·         There is a strong housing need in the area, particularly affordable housing;

·         Development of the site offers an opportunity for Exmouth to provide a gateway entrance to the town;

·         Opportunity to deliver a new sports facilities for Lympstone;

·         The site is visually well contained with a low landscape impact and is outside the East Devon AONB;

·         Existing route of the East Devon Way is protected and enhanced;

·         A highly sustainable option for development;

·         Existing boundary hedges and trees create a high level of visual containment;

·         The field to the north can be used for Biodiversity Net Gain;

 

Members raised the following questions:

o   Reassurance was sought about whether the footpath running through the centre would be protected.  Mr Seaton confirmed the footpath would be kept in situ.

o   Clarification was sought about the access from the A376 in the event that the Dinan Way extension did not happen.  Mr Seaton advised that there was a designed T junction arrangement that would permit access to the site.

o   Clarification was sought about the percentage of affordable houses that would be provided.  Mr Seaton advised that he would be looking to deliver in accordance with policy;

o   Clarification sought about the green wedge and the avoidance of coalescence.  In response Mr Seaton advised that there would be substantial residual distance which would include the recreation field in the southwest corner of the site and the landscape buffer.

 

Peter Skinner representing the Trustees of the Harefield Estate, Seaton

 

Land in the eastern fringe of Lympstone (GH/ED/74 & GH/ED/75

·         The site consists of one large grassed field with no buildings;

·         8 Ha. (20 acres);

·         Adjacent to and located on the eastern boundary of Lympstone with existing residential dwellings along the south western and southern boundaries and part of the north western boundary;

·         Access is excellent with the A376 running along the whole of the eastern boundary and Strawberry Hill running along the north western boundary;

·         Gently sloping with one or two steep slopes down to a small stream;

·         Within a nitrate vulnerable zone;

·         Outside the East Devon AONB and does not have any listed buildings within it;

·         Proposal of 118 dwellings which equate to six houses per acre;

·         The vast majority of the site lies within an area described as being a low flood risk;

·         GH/ED/74 has excellent access and very low visual impact;

·         This site would benefit from careful design with a mix of dwellings including starter homes and affordable homes.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought about the need for a sympathetic design in the village.  In response Mr Skinner advised the family has lived in the area for decades and it would be critical to make sure the housing numbers were appropriate to protect the landscape and that the land would be subject to conditions of sale

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Woodbury.

 

Iestyn John representing Devon Clinton Estates

 

Land East of Town Lane, Woodbury (Wood_20)

·         Eastern edge of the village;

·         7 Ha;

·         Not subject to land use designation;

·         Capacity for 8o dwellings with affordable housing provision;

·         Well contained with mature hedgerows around the boundary;

·         Not within the East Devon AONB;

·         Tree line screens the cricket field to the north;

·         Possibility to provide a reasonable access onto Town Lane.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification about the provision of a safe access for pedestrians and the need to protect trees and the great crested newts to the north of the site.  Mr John advised there would be opportunities for mitigation or the layout amended to address these issues once a detailed analysis has been completed as part of the planning application.

 

Iestyn John representing Devon Clinton Estates

 

Land South of Broadway, Woodbury (Wood_16)

·         The site is located north to Woodbury Village with an existing line of houses to the south east which runs along the lane and then the north western part adjoins the Cavanna Homes development;

·         It is a large unconstrained site with a flood zone to the south west;

·         Footpath connection runs along the eastern side along the river edge;

·         Agricultural land not subject to any specific designations;

·         Approximately 3.1 Ha;

·         Possible access into the site from different points which is one of the advantages of Broadway;

·         Opportunity to make the most of the footpath frontage on the western side;

·         Houses would look out onto the stream and designed to protect the integrity of the footpath;

·         Proposal for 90 dwellings;

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification about whether a roundabout could be provided at The Broadway to introduce calming measures.  Mr John acknowledged there was an issue and advised it would need to be dealt with through the planning application.

 

Amy Roberts, Bell Cornwell on behalf of GB House & Son

 

Top Yard, Land at Venmore Farm, Woodbury (Wood_03)

·         Existing residential dwellings are located immediately to the east of the site and directly opposite on the other side of the road;

·         It is in an sustainable location, 500m away from the centre of Woodbury;

·         0.5Ha of agriculturally developed land in a flat and prominent location;

·         There is existing road access with good visibility;

·         The existing buildings on the site have limited beneficial use and are used for agricultural storage;

·         Suitable for low density high quality housing for up to 8 dwellings;

·         Exploring pedestrian connectivity including footpath links east of The Broadway development;

·         Grade II listed farmhouse 30m to the east of the site with other existing listed buildings in between the sites;

·         There is a green vacant space on the western side that could provide a strong landscaping boundary feature and residential development could be contained within this feature to screen the development.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought on the listed buildings.  In response Mrs Roberts advised that the buildings on the site were not listed but the farmhouse was a Grade II listed building and there was some distance from the site to the other listed buildings;

o   Clarification sought about the footpath.  Mrs Roberts advised options were being explored about how to improve pedestrian connectivity with an opportunity to link the Broadway development;

 

Alan Sydenham, Herridge Property representing landowners

 

Land at Gillbrook, Woodbury (Wood_10)

·         Proposal for 60 dwellings with appropriate levels of affordable homes and public open space together with financial contributions towards any off-site improvements to existing village facilities that are required;

·         Existing houses to the north and west of the site;

·         The land immediately joins the existing built up boundary of the village and is in close proximity of the centre where retail facilities and post office are located;

·         The land is relatively level and currently in agricultural use with established trees and hedges around the site boundary to ensure the site will be well screened from adjoining houses;

·         Discussions ongoing for vehicle and pedestrian access which would include an extension to the existing 30mph speed limit to form an improved safer entrance into the village from the south.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought on the mix of houses proposed for the site.  In response Mr Sydenham suggested a mix of the normal two, three and four bedroom houses;

o   Clarification sought about the flood zone.  Mr Sydenham advised the brook runs along the northern boundary and a detailed investigation would need to be done to come up with a suitable solution to comply with regulations

o   Clarification sought about the access to the main village.  Mr Sydenham advised initial discussions had been undertaken into the land ownership along the existing access road with a couple of potential solutions to joining and creating new footpaths into the village including a footpath into Gilbert Place.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Sowton, Clyst St Mary.

 

Oliver Keates, OBK Land & Planning representing Core Strategic Land Ltd

 

Land at Clyst St Mary (Sowt_03)

·         This site is suitable for housing, surrounded on two sides by existing development to the immediate south and west and up to a clearly defined and defensible boundary of the show ground to the east;

·         This site is a sensible extension to Clyst St Mary and not ribbon development;

·         The Highway Authority have agreed an access in-principle to this site directly off the A3052 offering a safe and convenient access;

·         It is a sustainable location with a footpath/cycle link adjacent to the site and a bus stop in close proximity;

·         Development of this land would also provide an opportunity to complete a missing section of the adjacent footpath link thereby improving the safety of pedestrians;

·         All modes of access to the site are good;

·         This site links and relates well to the centre of Clyst St Mary;

·         There are no heritage assets or environmental designations;

·         There are no landscape or visual impact issues;

·         Provision of affordable housing.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought on the number of houses proposed.  In response Mr Keates advised there was a capacity for 50 dwellings;

o   Clarification sought about whether any of the proposed land is used for car parking at the showground.  Mr Keates confirmed that the land was privately owned and not in the ownership of the showground;

o   Clarification about the access onto the A3052.  Mr Keates advised that a traffic consultant had been consulted who suggested dedicated right hand turn similar to the Cavanna Homes access arrangements.

o   Clarification sought about the cycle and footway.  Mr Keates advised that the cycle and footway would be set back into the site and wouldn’t run parallel to the road as it would kick back slightly into the site to provide a much safer solution.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Exton.

 

Iestyn John representing Clinton Devon Estates

 

Land East of Exton Farm, Exton (Wood_28)

·         This site is located to the west of Exton with Mill Lane to the south;

·         Very well related to the settlement boundary of Exton with the Commando Training Centre immediately to the south west;

·         Existing properties around the site immediately to the east and up to the north;

·         Quite close to the centre of Exton;

·         Exton Farm close to the site is a listed building and there is also a flood plain which runs along the brook to the south;

·         Proposal for 40 dwellings with green infrastructure and provision of affordable housing;

·         Access onto Mill Lane to the south or a suggestion of a second or primary access up further around the corner;

·         The site sits outside the floodplain

 

Questions raised by Members:

·         Clarification about flooding issues at this location.  In response Mr John addressed the preliminary layout and suggested this would be addressed by a flood attenuation in the south eastern corner;

·         Clarification sought on the number of affordable houses.  Mr John advised affordable housing would be provided in accordance with policy;

·         Clarification sought on the management of the green open space.  Mr John agreed that something would need to be provided and typically it would be funded through a management agreement and advised this would be addressed in the planning application.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Kilmington.

 

Lucy White, Lucy White Planning and Neal Jillings representing Place Land Ltd

 

Land East of George Lane, Kilmington

·         2.5 Ha of flat agricultural land in single ownership;

·         Vehicular access deliverable;

·         A35 corridor to the north;

·         Closely associated with existing built up area of Kilmington and public open space;

·         Proposed allocation has capacity for around 35-40 dwellings;

·         Scale of development is commensurate to the size of the village;

·         At its closest the site is around 65m from the Grade II listed Old Inn;

·         The site has capacity to accommodate development without impact upon the listed building;

·         Setting and established landscaping would be retained and could be enhanced through additional planting;

·         Proposal for a 10m landscape buffer along the A35 for the site to be visually screened and contained and set back from the transport corridor;

·         Potential to re-establish orchard planting;

·         Potential for pedestrian and cycle connections towards village centre and the A35;

 

Questions raised by Members:

·         Clarification sought about the reference to the neighbourhood plan and whether the housing proposed would be in keeping with the same ratios.  In response Mrs White advised affordable housing would align with local plan policy and in terms of self-build the parish council were looking at approximately 10 self-build plots around the village but suggested there could be some movement on the overall mix;

·         Clarification sought about whether discussions had been undertaken with the parish council about whether they supported the L shaped part of the site.  Mrs White confirmed that the L shaped part was identified and supported by the Kilmington Parish Council through their neighbourhood plan;

·         Clarification sought about the access and the shops being on the other side of the main A35 and whether the speed limit would be reduced.  In response it was advised there was a need to look at highway safety as a key part of bringing forward this proposal and acknowledged improvements were required.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Otterton.

 

Iestyn John representing Clinton Devon Estates

 

Land at Bell Street, Otterton (Otto_01)

·         1.2 Ha in the centre of the village with the pub immediately to the north west and the school to the left of the village;

·         Surrounded on four sides by existing dwellings;

·         The character of Otterton would need to be respected;

·         Conservation Area to the north with listed buildings to the west;

·         The site has a hedgerow boundary with a thin tree line;

·         Access to Orchard Close on the north eastern side;

·         Proposal for 11 dwellings in keeping with the character of Otterton;

·         The site comprises two parcels of land with the smaller parcel allowing 3 dwellings.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought about retaining all the trees and hedgerows.  In response Mr John confirmed this was correct as the character of the area would make this important;

o   Clarification sought about the parking issue in Otterton and the need to consider a car park.  Mr John advised the landowners were aware of the parking issues and had been in discussions with the parish council about this and suggested provided parking could be delivered in a way that was not harmful to the character of the area it would be something that could be considered;

o   Clarification sought on the area of space that was being ignored and what was the reason for this.  Mr John advised it was to address some of the constraints in relation to the historic buildings and an expectation of some wider community benefit.

 

Iestyn John representing Clinton Devon Estates

 

Land adjacent to North Star, Otterton (Otto_02)

·         The site abuts onto Fore Street towards the northern part of the village;

·         0.4 Ha of land with a proposal for 6 dwellings;

·         An infill plot on the road frontage within the built up area of the village and on the edge of the conservation area;

·         The front of the properties would form part of the flood zone;

·         The land rises gently to the west with various trees and hedgerows along the boundary;

·         The dwellings would be set back to avoid the flood zone with the back of the development running along the same line as the existing buildings;

·         Opportunities to address the landscape character and to protect the existing hedgerows which form the perimeter of the site;

·         Proposed landscape buffer and flood zone buffer on the eastern side.

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought about the level of the proposed dwellings compared to the level of the brook which causes flooding.  Mr John advised the land would be higher and reminded Members that the dwellings would be built outside the flood zone because of the change in level.

 

The following presentations were presented to Members for Sidbury.

 

Dan Yeates, Savills, George Cave & James Tizzard representing Land Value Alliances

 

Land South of Furzehill, Sidbury (SIDM_10)

·         DCC work ongoing for phase 1 of the cycle route from Sidford to Hillside and phase 2 will be incorporated in any forthcoming plans for plan between Hillside and Furzehill, although at present DCC do not have a budget to deliver phase 2;

·         The proposed development would be close to a primary school, shop, pub and sports pitch as well as regular bus services;

·         The site would lie within an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty;

·         Opportunity for a low carbon sustainable development which would provide a variety of house types including self-build and affordable housing;

·         Biodiversity Net Gain would be achieved and enhanced habitats for wildlife;

·         Located on the edge of the village;

·         Opportunity to connect to cycle network;

·         Opportunities to deliver open space, allotment and play area;

·         Opportunity to deliver a site larger than that currently identified which would bring flexibility to deliver a greater scale of house types;

·         The land is steep, sloping downwards from west to east;

·         Opportunity to improve pedestrian link to the village centre;

·         Existing green infrastructure on the southern boundary would screen the development from the adjacent listed building;

·         Proposal of 40 – 50 dwellings including affordable houses and market;

 

Questions raised by Members:

o   Clarification sought about the change in the size of the development than what was initially proposed;

o   Clarification sought about whether there would be access onto the A375 from the two fields.  Mr Yeates advised that more work was still needed and suggested a further access could be considered further up the development.

o   Clarification sought on the biodiversity;  Mr Yeates advised there would be a need to discuss with local community and stakeholders to explore the right types of open space and biodiversity enhancements and opportunities;

o   Clarification sought on the proposed protection for the Grade II Listed Building.  Mr Yeates more work was needed and advised the pocket part had been introduced to give that separation.

o   Clarification sought on how the development would deal with the AONB view from the other side of the valley.  Mr Yeates advised the development would be on the lower parts of the site and there would be a need to explore planting and buffers;

o   Clarification sought on the existing vegetation and whether new vegetation would be planted.  Mr Yeates advised existing trees would not be removed within the site but some trees may be removed to allow site access and confirmed there would also be additional planting;

o   Clarification sought about the number of affordable housing that would be provided.  Mr Yeates advised the number of affordable houses would be policy compliant;

o   Clarification sought about the number of houses proposed and whether this number was too many for the area.  Mr Yeates acknowledged that there were more dwellings proposed than as detailed in the local plan but this was to provide a higher quality of house and to spread them apart rather than condensing them into one field.  In response the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised that Members could only consider the northern part of the site as this site had only been submitted through the call for sites and the HELAA process and this stage the rest of the site could not be considered unless Members wanted to undertake an additional call for sites later if there was a shortfall in housing numbers.