Agenda item

Redevelopment to form 47 No Retirement Living Apartments for Older People (Sixty Years of Age and/or Partner over Fifty-Five Years of age), Guest Apartment, Communal Facilities, Access, Car Parking and Landscaping.

That planning application 2023/1275/FUL  be DEFERRED for a maximum of 2 months to allow further negotiations regarding the level of car parking proposed and the quantum of  S106 contributions for off-site affordable housing delivery.

Votes – 8 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention

Redevelopment to form 47 No Retirement Living Apartments for Older People (Sixty Years of Age and/or Partner over Fifty-Five Years of age), Guest Apartment, Communal Facilities, Access, Car Parking and Landscaping.

The Officer’s Report stated that this application had been automatically referred to the Planning Committee because the divisional Member and Wells City Council had objected, and the application was classified as a major application.

The application related to the redevelopment of a former police station. The proposal sought to demolish all buildings on site and construct a 47-unit age restricted retirement flat complex with associated communal facilities, landscaping, vehicular access, and car parking. The development would consist of 31 one-bedroom units and 16 two-bedroom units. It was a re-submission of planning application 2020/2234/FUL which had been approved in April 2023. The design of the new application was almost identical to the approved scheme with the main change being to viability, in particular, a reduction in the off-site affordable housing contribution from approx. £434k to £100k. 

The Report continued that the revised viability report, including the methodology and revised inputs, had been heavily scrutinised and subjected to an independent review by Stephen Blake Consultancy Ltd. The viability report concluded that the scheme could not support any financial contribution towards affordable housing (or any other section 106 financial contributions). As a result of this, the Officers were willing to accept the independent review recommendation to allow a reduced affordable housing contribution. The monies would support other affordable housing schemes in the Somerset East area as and when they were proposed. The contribution, albeit less than the amount agreed under the previous planning permission, was still seen as a significant benefit to the scheme.

In summary, the Planning Officer stated that the planning obligations would comprise of the following:

• £100,000 towards off-site affordable housing.
• £17,484 towards the cost mitigation of the pressures on the local healthcare facility.

• Purchase of 3.36 kg/year phosphate credits (on the basis that occupation of the development is delayed until after the upgrades to the Wells wastewater treatment works have occurred (post December 2024).

The application was therefore recommended for approval.

The Planning Officer explained the application to the Committee with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.

The Committee was then addressed by the planning agent. She made the following comments:

• Acknowledged the revised application was not an ideal situation.
• Since the original application was approved in 2021, there have been significant cost increases in purchasing off-site phosphate mitigation.
• Significant increase in build costs of around 17%.
• Additional costs relating to building regulation enhancements.
• All combined to affect the viability of the proposal.
• Development will meet the needs of older people in a highly sustainable location.
• Significant social benefits providing residents with a safe and friendly environment.

In the discussion which followed Members were disappointed with the reduction in S106 monies. Many felt the contribution for affordable housing should be earmarked for Wells. The Planning Officer confirmed that it was not possible to specify where it would be spent but that it would be used where most needed in the Somerset East area.

Another concern was the level of car parking provision. Some Members felt that 23 spaces were not enough, as this only equated to 0.49 space per apartment. The Highways Officer advised that car parking provision was in excess of the minimum required for this class of development. The minimum was 1 space per 13 bedrooms. Despite this, Members remained concerned that the provision was inadequate. 

The Legal Advisor reminded Members that the previous application had been approved by the Authority and that it was an extant permission. It would be difficult to now refuse the application for new reasons such as car parking and advised that a deferral of the application would be better to enable Planning Officers to speak to the applicant about their concerns.

Planning Officers re-iterated that a full independent viability assessment had been carried out and as a result, Officers were minded to accept the revised affordable housing contribution of £100k. Ultimately, there was a risk that the applicant could appeal a decision and withdraw this offer.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed by Councillor Edric Hobbs and seconded by Councillor Philip Ham to defer the application for a maximum of 2 months to enable Planning Officers to speak to the applicant about an increase in car parking provision and an increased S106 contribution for off-site affordable housing.

On being put to the vote the proposal was carried with 8 votes in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.

RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/1275/FUL  be DEFERRED for a maximum of 2 months to allow further negotiations regarding the level of car parking proposed and the quantum of  S106 contributions for off-site affordable housing delivery.

Votes – 8 in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention