Agenda item

Outline application with some matters reserved for the erection of 12no. dwellings

The Committee considered a report of the Principal Planning Officer regarding an outline application with some matters reserved for the erection of 12no. dwellings (for copy see file of Minutes).

A Caines, Principal Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the application which included photographs of the site. Members had viewed the location during the site visits that day.

In presenting the report the Officer referred to a proposed amendment to condition 4 requiring the scheme to contain no less than 2 bungalows which were to be constructed prior to the occupation of the 4^th dwelling on the site. Following a request from the applicant for more flexibility it was considered reasonable to require the construction of the bungalows prior to the occupation of the 8^th dwelling.

J Lavender, the applicant’s agent informed Members of developments which had resulted in the removal of the affordable housing element from the scheme. Following unsuccessful negotiations with Registered Social Landlords and Housing Associations, discussions with Planning Officers had resulted in a viability assessment being carried out. This assessment had established that the scheme would not be viable with the inclusion of affordable housing.   

Notwithstanding these developments J Lavender considered that the scheme was in accordance with NPPF Policy, and was subject to material planning considerations, one of which was a contribution towards the provision of open space in the area. A draft S106 Agreement had been presented to the Local Planning Authority.

Councillor Clare referred to the original report considered in November 2010 which stated that any decision on the scheme was ‘finely balanced’ and that the provision of the affordable housing units was in response to a recognised need. It was therefore clear at the time that key to the approval of this application was the provision of affordable housing.

At the time Officers had looked at whether the community could sustain additional houses. Councillor Clare advised that there were currently 15 houses for sale in Butterknowle which demonstrated that the village could not support 12 new properties but needed affordable homes.

He therefore asked if, through no fault of the applicant, the absence of affordable housing would prejudice development of the whole site.

By way of clarification C Cuskin, Legal Officer stated that the key issue for Members was whether the development should be approved without a S106 Agreement to secure 4 affordable dwellings. The decision taken by Members in 2010 to approve the application remained, as the scheme was physically unchanged.

The Principal Planning Officer responded to comments and questions from Members. He confirmed that the need for affordable housing remained but  the assessment undertaken by the Local Planning Authority had concluded that it was not viable on this site. The proposals had been assessed under the revised policy framework of the NPPF which recognised the need for flexibility to take account of changing market conditions. The greenfield/brownfield consideration given to the application in 2010 was much less important now, with sustainability being the key criteria of the NPPF. 

In view of the responses provided by the Legal Officer and Principal Planning Officer, and as there was no economic viability for the development of affordable housing on the site, Councillor Clare supported the proposals.

In expressing his support to the application Councillor Buckham appreciated how difficult it was to bring schemes forward in the current economic climate and agreed with the proposed amendment to condition 4.

Councillor Mowbray concurred with the comments made by Members and Officers noting that no Registered Social Landlords or Housing Associations had come forward, and that policies in the NPPF were now relevant to the consideration of the scheme. He also welcomed the S106 contribution to open space provision and maintenance in the area. 

Councillor Richardson stated that he could not support the proposals without the inclusion of affordable housing.

Following a question from Councillor Zair Members were advised that the S106 contribution had been calculated using criteria set out in the Local Plan. The Parish Council would decide how the contribution was allocated.

Councillor Davidson expressed disappointment that the scheme could only go ahead if the affordable housing element was removed, however following the comments made by Officers and the agent, and the extensive work carried out as part of viability assessments, he was satisfied that it would not be viable on this site.

Following much discussion it was Resolved:

That the application be approved subject to

(i)         the conditions outlined in the report with condition 4 being amended to read as follows:

  ‘4. The Scheme hereby approved shall contain no less than 2       bungalows which shall be constructed prior to the occupation of the 8^th dwelling on the site.’       

(ii)        the completion of a new Section 106 Agreement for a contribution of £12,000 towards the provision and maintenance of recreational open space in the local area.