Agenda item

Report of Head of Planning and Regeneration

The Planning and Development Team Manager presented the report to Members.

In response to a question from Councillor D J Stevenson, the Affordable Housing Enabling Officer advised Members that this had been a long drawn out application but the solution before them was the best option. She stated that the site was one of three in the village and that the other two developments were providing affordable housing in the form of low cost home ownership and an offsite commuted sum payment. She informed Members that in accepting a reduced number the affordable housing on this site the homes would be provided at an affordable rent which would help to secure a balanced mix of affordable homes to suit different needs across the current developments in the village.  She also informed Members that the one and two bedroom properties provided would also meet the identified affordable need in the area.  While Officers had hoped to secure a better mix of affordable housing on this particular site circumstances have prevented this and having some units, as would be the case if this application was granted, was better than having nothing.

In response to a question from Councillor J G Coxon, the Affordable Housing Enabling Officer advised Members that the mix of units would be 4 no. 1 bed maisonettes and 3 no. 2 bed houses.

Councillor J G Coxon stated that he did not agree with any part of the application.

Councillor D J Stevenson stated that the 1 bed homes had been requested due to the need in the area.

Councillor R Adams sought assurance that the homes would be occupied by people on the District Council’s waiting list. The Affordable Housing Enabling Officer confirmed this would be the case.

Councillor D Harrison expressed concerns over the number of reports that the Committee was having to consider in regards to amending affordable housing obligations, and that it would continue if the Council agreed to the amendments each time, adding that it made a mockery of the Council’s stance on affordable units. He stated that he knew the site in question and that there were substantial 5 bed houses, but affordable housing was much needed. He proposed that a premium of £5 - £10k should be paid to the Parish to stop the constant change to consents once they had been given.

The amendment to the motion, as proposed by Councillor D Harrison, was not seconded.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration informed Members that the rules surrounding changes to affordable housing obligations were set by Central Government. Therefore, upon registered providers advising the Council that they were facing difficulties in financing the scheme, the Council was under an obligation to enter into negotiations with the registered providers. He stated that it was not a case of rolling over but weighing up the pros and cons of each proposed amendment, and adding that a contribution or payment to the Parish was not without merit but for the purposes of the affordable housing consideration in front of the Committee it would not be compliant under the CIL Regulations.

Councillor J Legrys stated that Councillor D Harrison had hit the nail on the head, however regulations stated that the developer was entitled to ask us to consider accepting revised planning obligations due to the current market situation. He further highlighted that the changes had been approved by the District Valuer and that he would rather have seven units rather than none.

It was moved by Councillor J Bridges, seconded by Councillor J Legrys and

RESOLVED THAT:

The substitution of the existing affordable housing obligations by the provision of 7 units in accordance with the house type and tenure mix as set out in the report by agreed.