Agenda item

Recommendation: Conditional approval subject to legal agreement.

Proposal: Outline planning application for the proposed erection of 57

dwellings suitable for older persons accommodation following demolition of the existing dwellings (Access, Layout, Scale and Appearance to be considered).

Applicant: Arlington Retirement Lifestyles

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 25 to 162.

The Committee were advised that updates contained within the Supplementary Planning Agenda included:

·         Revised wording in relation to the deferred payment mechanism;

·         Clarification that the S106 agreement was well-advanced and would be completed in the coming weeks should planning permission be granted;

·         Clarification that the current viability issues were largely as a result of the existing use and structures on the site, resulting in a relatively high site value.

Trefor Fisher, Sonning Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application. Trefor stated that the Parish Council wished to reiterate their very strong objection to this application, including that the site was situated within an unsustainable location. Trefor added that the previous application required £1.6m of affordable housing contributions, whilst this application would only require a fraction of that amount which could set a dangerous precedent for future applications. Trefor stated that the Parish Council hoped that a timely policy change would be implemented by Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) with regards to affordable housing contributions. Trefor thanked WBC Planning officers for their work on this application, in particular for calculating the deferred payment mechanism which appeared to ensure fair affordable housing contributions going forwards should profit uplift occur. Trefor stated that in addition to this application, there were a variety of proposed developments, and developments with planning permission in the locality, which represented massive overdevelopment in what was a historic area.

Michael Firmager, Ward Member, spoke in objection to the application. Michael concurred with the points raised by Sonning Parish Council, and noted the views of local residents and local MP in objecting to this application. Michael questioned who had the final say on whether a development was unprofitable, and was of the opinion that the original application would have been refused if it only offered an affordable housing contribution of £100k. Michael was of the opinion that that this was a substandard and inappropriate development, and asked that the applicant withdraw the application or that the Committee refuse planning permission.

John Kaiser noted that the deferred payment mechanism essentially met the Committee’s request from the previous meeting, ensuring that profit uplift made an appropriate contribution to affordable housing payments.

David Cornish commented that Sonning was one of the most expensive parts of the country, and as such property development should be profitable if an appropriate amount was paid for the land. David added that the Committee had pursued this line of enquiry, and were bound by prevailing Government Policy. David urged the Committee, Parish Council and residents to respond to the Government’s ongoing consultation on the NPPF to change how such calculations were carried out for future applications.

Stephen Conway stated that the Committee had taken the issue of viability as far as they could, and subject to the deferred payment mechanism he was minded to support the officer recommendation.

Andrew Mickleburgh queried whether the deferred payment mechanism allowed for up to £1.6m to be paid as affordable housing contributions, and how issues might be resolved throughout the life of the deferred payment mechanism. Andrew Chugg, case officer, confirmed that up to £1.6m of affordable housing contributions could be delivered via the deferred payment mechanism, whilst WBC and the independent valuers would scrutinise the detail regarding any profit uplift.

Al Neal queried if this application would be recommended for approval if it was submitted as a fresh application. Andrew Chugg stated that the situation had changed since the original application was submitted, as WBC could no longer demonstrate a five-year housing land supply. An independent valuation had demonstrated that the development would not be viable in line with the original affordable housing contribution.

David Cornish queried if this application could set a precedent where an application would be approved with full affordable housing contributions, only to be resubmitted at a later date with a lesser contribution and the principle of development established. Andrew Chugg stated that this application did not set a precedent, as each application would be assessed on its own merits at a particular point in time based on all relevant planning policy.

Stephen Conway commented that the built form of this application was very similar to that previously approved, and noted that a deferred payment mechanism was in place which was in accordance with national planning policy.

John Kaiser stated that a sixty-percent share in any profit uplift could prove to be a positive precedent for the Borough going forwards.

John Kaiser proposed that the application be approved as per the officer recommendation, the updated deferred payment mechanism as set out in the Supplementary Planning Agenda, and subject to legal agreement. This was seconded by Stephen Conway.

RESOLVED That application number 220663 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 29 to 38, the updated deferred payment mechanism as set out in the Supplementary Planning Agenda, and subject to legal agreement.