24-home outline scheme at Land East of School Lane, Hartford, Northwich

What was proposed

The application sought outline permission for up to 24 market and affordable homes, with access approved and other details reserved.

“DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT: Outline application for construction of up to 24no. dwellings and associated access…”

“The application seeks outline application for construction of up to 24 dwellings and associated access, with a mix of both market and affordable dwellings (30%). The application seeks outline consent with approval for access. Matters relating to landscape, appearance, scale and layout are reserved matters and are not considered as part of this application.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The 1.3-hectare grassed field lies outside Hartford’s settlement boundary, beside homes, School Lane, the A556 and existing woodland.

“Reason for being reported to Planning Committee: The application has been called in to the Planning Committee by Cllr Parkes due to concerns over highway safety (position and layout of the access), the visual impact of the boundary treatments (from the A556) and the principle of the development bearing in mind the location outside of the settlement boundary.”

“The site consists of a grassed field, covering approximately 1.3 hectares to the south east of Hartford. It is within the countryside but adjoins the settlement boundary to the north and west. It is bound by residential development to the west and north (dwellings front the opposite side of School Lane and a development known as Quaintways lies to the north).”

Officer report

Earlier site history

An earlier application approved use of the existing field exit onto School Lane for access to High Acre and a hardcore driveway.

“APP/2003/0092- Use of existing field exit onto School Lane for Domestic vehicular access to High Acre and provision of hardcore driveway along field boundary. Approved.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The parish council, civic society and other respondents objected over highways, congestion, services, landscape, ecology, amenity and policy conflicts, while consultees largely raised no objection subject to conditions.

“Highways Officer – No objection, subject to conditions in respect of works within the highways and construction method statement.”

“Hartford Civic Society- Object due to the loss of greenspace, lack of services, distance from services, outside settlement boundary, properties too close to the road will suffer from pollution and noise, out of character, contrary to the Neighbourhood Plan, located in an ASLEV, highway concerns, contrary to policy.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke for the application and Councillor Patricia Parkes spoke as ward councillor.

Members’ debate

Members discussed outline permission, traffic effects, the neighbourhood plan, alternative sites, housing supply and the landscape impact of building on undeveloped land.

“Members requested officers to advise what was the difference between this application asking for outline permission in comparison to full planning applications including reference to reserved matters. Officers advised applicants have the choice of route they take, outline planning permission is a two-stage application, with the outline being the permission and reserved matters are the detailed plans that follow.”

“Members expressed concerns on the detrimental effect these residential units would have on the A556, they were informed, the Highways officer had reviewed submissions. They felt the anticipated increase in traffic congestion would be alleviated by a right hand turn into the development. Reflecting on the points raised by Hartford Parish Council, members sought clarification on the weight of the Neighbourhood plan in their decision making.”

Minutes

The vote

Members voted seven to four in favour of approving the application, subject to the stated conditions and late information.

“A proposal to approve the application, subject to the conditions set out in the report and the late information report was passed with seven votes in favour and four against. Decided that the application be approved.”

Minutes