The Case Officer presented the proposals and a summary of responses from statutory consultees were given. The relevant planning history and planning policies was set out within the report. Members were advised that the outline application was granted planning permission subject to conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement at Planning Committee in November 2015. The Section 106 Agreement has still yet to be completed. An independent assessor was appointed to appraise the submitted viability assessment and its conclusions in respect of the S106 contributions. The Independent Assessor indicated that the full 25% affordable housing contributions would make the development unviable. However, it was concluded that the development could provide six affordable housing units together with the full remaining S106 and CIL contributions. Reverend Cannon John Patrick spoke in support of the application as the applicant, he advised that: He is a trustee of Trinity Hospital and the land owner of the site. He spoke at Planning Committee in 2015 when the outline application was granted subject to Section 106 agreement. A viability exercise was carried out and the site was identified as not viable with some of the Section 106 contributions. Other Section 106 contributions will remain. Trinity hospital is not medical care but is for hospitality. He is committed to the town and the built heritage assets around. The proposal is a high quality gateway and hopes that the modification of the Section 106 is agreed. Members raised questions/concerns regarding the following: The project price level for affordable housing within the area. The drop in affordable housing from the original outline application. The timelines from when planning permissions are granted and the agreement of the Section 106. Relationship between CIL and affordable housing. In response to questions raised it was noted that affordable housing prices are normally 25% less than market value. The Interim Development Team Manager also outlined that an independent assessor has been out to the site and concluded that the development could provide only six affordable housing units. Grant planning permission subject RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEAD OF REGENERATION – to the modifications to the S106 planning obligations as detailed in the report. Voting for taking this course of action: FOR: None. AGAINST: Councillors D Brett, H Burton, G Clarkson, S Fielding, G Freeman, K H Isard, G A N Oxby, D G Pidwell, S Scotthorne and T Taylor. ABSTAIN: Councillor M W Quigley. COMMITTEE DECISION Refuse planning permission for the following reason: – Reduction in affordable housing. FURTHER RESOLVED that the final wording of the reasons for refusal be approved at the Planning Consultation Group.
The Case Officer presented the proposals and a summary of responses from statutory consultees were given. The relevant planning history and planning policies was set out within the report. Members were advised that the outline application was granted planning permission subject to conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement at Planning Committee in November 2015. The Section 106 Agreement has still yet to be completed. An independent assessor was appointed to appraise the submitted viability assessment and its conclusions in respect of the S106 contributions. The Independent Assessor indicated that the full 25% affordable housing contributions would make the development unviable. However, it was concluded that the development could provide six affordable housing units together with the full remaining S106 and CIL contributions. Reverend Cannon John Patrick spoke in support of the application as the applicant, he advised that: He is a trustee of Trinity Hospital and the land owner of the site. He spoke at Planning Committee in 2015 when the outline application was granted subject to Section 106 agreement. A viability exercise was carried out and the site was identified as not viable with some of the Section 106 contributions. Other Section 106 contributions will remain. Trinity hospital is not medical care but is for hospitality. He is committed to the town and the built heritage assets around. The proposal is a high quality gateway and hopes that the modification of the Section 106 is agreed. Members raised questions/concerns regarding the following: The project price level for affordable housing within the area. The drop in affordable housing from the original outline application. The timelines from when planning permissions are granted and the agreement of the Section 106. Relationship between CIL and affordable housing. In response to questions raised it was noted that affordable housing prices are normally 25% less than market value. The Interim Development Team Manager also outlined that an independent assessor has been out to the site and concluded that the development could provide only six affordable housing units. RECOMMENDATION OF THE HEAD OF REGENERATION – Grant planning permission subject to the modifications to the S106 planning obligations as detailed in the report. Voting for taking this course of action: FOR: None. AGAINST: Councillors D Brett, H Burton, G Clarkson, S Fielding, G Freeman, K H Isard, G A N Oxby, D G Pidwell, S Scotthorne and T Taylor. ABSTAIN: Councillor M W Quigley. COMMITTEE DECISION – Refuse planning permission for the following reason: Reduction in affordable housing. FURTHER RESOLVED that the final wording of the reasons for refusal be approved at the Planning Consultation Group.