Decision details

Councillor Blencowe assumed the Chair for this item.

The Committee received a reserved matters application (access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) pursuant to outline planning permission 07/0620/OUT for the development of 165 residential dwellings, plus associated open space, infrastructure and car parking

The Principal Planner referred to report paragraph 8.28: The s106 agreement contains a cascade mechanism to allow the approved affordable housing provider (BPHA) to seek a variation to the split based on appropriate evidence and financial appraisals explaining the need for the variation. Officers had not yet been able to complete this process due to holidays. It was expected to be W/C 23 February 2015.

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report.

       i.          Complimented the design.

     ii.          Storage was required for different sized/shape bikes.

In response to Members’ questions the Principal Planner said the following:

       i.          This development would deliver the affordable housing as 60% social rented and 40% intermediate. Figures could not go below those submitted, which were based on previous discussions.

     ii.          The drag distance for southern courtyard waste bins should not be a problem for refuse crews.

   iii.          The Ecology Officer raised no objections to the Clay Farm Parcels 6 & 7 development, in particular regarding the impact on bats or hedgehogs.

   iv.          Information regarding sunlight and daylight suggested there should be no negative impact where two storey buildings were surrounded by higher ones. The street scene would also be improved by different building types and heights.

    v.          The housing mix for the Reserved Matters Site was set out on P60 of the agenda pack.

In response to Members’ questions the Development Officer (Growth) said the following:

       i.          The s106 agreement had been agreed in the outline permission, which included affordable housing figures.

     ii.          Financial viability information is required from housing providers. BPHA experienced a change in circumstances in 2011 due to HCA changes to national funding for affordable housing. BPHA resubmitted financial information reflecting the change in circumstances.

The Legal Advisor stated the s106 process had to be followed. If the Council is satisfied with the information submitted, it has no discretion to renegotiate the agreement. The cascade set out in the s106 agreement set parameters for the split of affordable housing in case the original figures were not deliverable. JDCC asked for final cascade figures to be reported back to committee in future. The Development Officer undertook to do so.

The Committee:

Resolved (by 8 votes to 0 with 0 abstentions – SCDC Councillors did not vote) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officers.