Issue - meetings

21/01882/FP Land East Rhee Spring And Orwell View, Royston Road, Baldock, Hertfordshire

Meeting: 21/03/2024 - Planning Control Committee (Item 196)

196 21/01882/FP LAND EAST RHEE SPRING AND ORWELL VIEW, ROYSTON ROAD, BALDOCK, HERTFORDSHIRE pdf icon PDF 535 KB

REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION MANAGER    

Proposed residential development for 42 dwellings, access, parking, landscaping and associated works, including provision of an electrical sub-station (as amended by plans and documents received 23.08.2022, 29.09.2022, 20.12.2023 and 27/02/24).

Additional documents:

Decision:

RESOLVED: That application 21/01882/FP be REFUSED planning permission as the proposed development would make insufficient contribution towards meeting the District’s affordable housing needs identified in the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 to 2031 and therefore would conflict with the aims of Local Plan Policy HS2.

Minutes:

Audio recording: 2 hour 19 minutes 52 seconds

 

N.B Councillor Nigel Mason returned to the Chamber at 21:51

 

In response to declarations of interests from Councillors Michael Muir and Steve Jarvis the Locum Planning Lawyer stated that there was no conflict of interest for County Councillors.

 

The Development Management Team Leader provided an updated that:

 

·       There had been three updates published on the 20 March 2024 regarding this matter.

·       There was a typographical error in paragraph 4.2.1 as there were 20 detached dwellings and not 22 as stated.

 

The Development Management Team Leader presented the report in respect of Application 21/01882/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

 

The following Members asked points of clarification:

 

·       Councillor Tom Tyson

·       Councillor Ian Mantle

·       Councillor Steve Jarvis

·       Councillor David Levett

·       Councillor Nigel Mason

·       Councillor Michael Muir

 

In response to points of clarification, the Development Management Team Leader advised that:

 

·       There would be 7 dwellings facing onto the Royston Road with a northern strip of landscaping, both of which met the Neighbourhood plan criteria.

·       There was a water course on the eastern boundary, and there would be tree planting to provide boundary screening.

·       There would be a payment to the Council for maintenance of the greenspaces. There was provision off site for play space and a park.

·       There had been two rounds of viability reports produced, with the latest considering the high interest rates and housing market prices. The outcome of this report stated that it was not viable to increase the affordable housing units.

·       The applicant was the County Council, and payments would be made to the District Council ahead of the County Council.

·       There would be a clawback clause as part of the S106 agreement and this would be issued before the decision notice. The viability would need to be reassessed under paragraph 4.3.42 and should it be deemed that it was feasible to build more affordable housing then any, S106 payments would need to be made to North Herts Council before the NHS or the County Council.

·       The Council reviewed the viability assessment and concluded that the viability could not be meet on the site. This was provided as an appendix to the report.

·       The applicant had stated that settle did not want the EV charging points on the affordable houses.

·       Work was still ongoing on the details of the clawback, and only one new viability assessment would be completed, and this would be prior to the start of construction work.

·       The was a function within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which allowed for viability to be assessed. It was noted that affordable housing was the biggest costs for a developer.

·       Policy HS2 of the Local Plan gave the Council discretion in genuine circumstances to vary the percentage of affordable housing.

·       The majority of dwellings would have active EV charging points and only 2 would have passive points.

·       The independent assessor of the viability statement concluded that they agreed with the affordable housing mix put forward by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 196