Outline application for the erection of 40 extra care independent living units with ancillary accommodation areas, parking and associated infrastructure, 4 live/work units and 8 business units (Use Class B1)

Outline application for the erection of 40 extra care independent living units with ancillary accommodation areas, parking and associated infrastructure, 4 live/work units and 8 business units (Use Class B1)

Please refer to the late material circulated before the start of the meeting

Principal Planning Officer, Tony Pope, referred to the late material that had been circulated before the start of the meeting and reported a correction to the revised recommendation on page 2 of the document. He said that delegated authority to the Group Manager for Planning and Housing and to the Group Manager for Legal and Democratic should be corrected to require completion of a satisfactory legal agreement or unilateral undertaking to secure 40 per cent, (and not all), of the extra care properties as affordable. Furthermore, condition 13 on page 55 of the schedule of applications to read, a minimum of 40 per cent of the floor space of the units, and not 50 per cent.

The Planning Officer outlined the amended revised recommendation and additional condition (14), as detailed in the late material, before inviting the council’s Strategic Housing Manager, Malcom Vine to give an overview of what Extra Care Independent Living constituted.

The Strategic Housing Manager said that an extra care facility was different from a conventional sheltered housing scheme and residential or care home, in that it provided a supportive environment where older and vulnerable people could live independently for as long as they wished. He said that, as the need for care increased, residents have the option to have care services brought to them rather than move to a care or residential home. The Housing Manager said that other districts were rolling out extra care schemes on a large scale and that nationally the scheme appeared to be the way forward for housing particularly for older people. He said that the County Council and the Forest of Dean District Council had a shared vision of enabling as good a quality of housing provision in the district as available elsewhere. It was hoped this would reduce the dependency on residential care, (currently quite high in Gloucestershire), and provide a better option for local people. He went on to say that it was the council’s intention to provide extra care in each of the four towns in the district and that the Cleeve Mill scheme constituted the extra care provision for Newent and surrounding villages. He said that the scheme would give another option for under occupied family housing, whether rented or owned, and free up housing for local families. Furthermore, the scheme would enhance current services for older people and not replace or compete with existing provisions.

Public speaking

Speaking as the agent for the application, a representative for the Two Rivers Housing Association made the following statement: -

The application before you seeks planning permission for the erection of 40 extra care living units, 4 live/work units and 8 business units. In planning terms, the principle of development has been established, as the site is located within the settlement boundary. Planning Policy states priority is afforded to developing sites within the settlement boundary. Contrary to popular belief, the site is not designated for employment use in the Local Plan. The only reference made in the Local Plan is the Council’s aspiration for employment development of the site, given the employment history of the site. By way of background, in the 1990’s permission was granted for an employment development, which was only partially implemented and has now lapsed. The site has remained vacant for a significant period of time, (demonstrating the lack of interest in the site), and therefore suitability for sole employment development. Despite professional agents marketing the site for commercial use, little interest has been expressed over a period in excess of three years.

This proposed mix of development utilises a site suitable for development. Employment does not need to be provided to accord with Local Plan Policy, yet the Two Rivers Housing Association recognise the need for sustainable development and employment opportunities in the District. On this basis, the proposed mix of development seeks to provide a viable, deliverable mix of development, whilst providing 56 employment opportunities. The mix of development is not a justified reason to not support the application as the proposal fully accords with Policies R.FE3 and R.FE2 of the District Local Plan Review.

Planning officers at both County and District level are in support of the proposed development. The Strategic Housing Officer states, (as detailed in the officers report), ‘Extra Care Housing will provide a real and positive alternative to residential care and officers consider that this scheme configures well with the strategic objective for future provision of older and other vulnerable people with support needs.’ This is especially important given the increase in the percentage of the ageing population in the District. Furthermore, Highways Officers at Gloucestershire County Council have confirmed that the proposal will have no detrimental impact on the highway safety of the surrounding area and that the level of parking is satisfactory. Severn Trent Water also supports the application, subject to condition. The design of the scheme takes into consideration the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and the character of nearby buildings. It is believed therefore, that the application will not have a negative impact on residential and visual amenity and is in accordance with Policies RFBE.1 and RFNE.1 of the Local Plan Review. The proposed application is fully in accordance with National, Regional and Local Planning Policy and in respect of planning matters, there are no valid reasons not to support this application.

Local member, (Newent Central), Councillor Len Lawton, said that he was pleased with the revised recommendation but believed there were some other important factors to consider, including; (i) the outcome of a recent smell survey in September 2011, where no adverse smell had been detected, (the survey had been undertaken during hot climate conditions, therefore providing a fair assessment of the situation); (ii) following personal investigations, Councillor Lawton had found the efficiency of the Severn Trent Treatment Plant to be running at less than full capacity, (iii) outlining the history of the site, Councillor Lawton said that the site had been available for development for many years now, (including better and more favourable financial conditions), with no success in developing the land. Supporting the application, and noting that additional condition (14) addressed some of the town council’s previous concerns, Councillor Lawton believed the proposals was the best opportunity to utilise the site fully and correctly.

Committee consideration

Local member, (Newent North East), Councillor Roger Yeates, was pleased about the possibility of providing more local employment and making improvements to the site, but was also concerned about access arrangements and increased traffic movements on to the B4221 highway.

In response to Councillor Philip Burford, who questioned why the level of affordable housing at the site had been limited to 40 per cent and not 100 per cent, Group Manager for Planning and Housing, Peter Williams, said that 40 per cent affordable housing was a sufficient enough amount to secure the council’s policy position, and that, given the circumstances and planning history of the site, was thought to be a reasonable requirement. He felt this was particularly relevant when considered in conjunction with the other conditions the developer would be required to undertake. Strategic Housing Manager, Malcom Vine, endorsed this statement and said that the driving force behind securing affordable housing was to make the requirement viable.

Responding to concerns from Councillor Frankie Evans, regarding parking arrangements at the site, Principal Planning Officer, Tony Pope, said that the number of parking spaces allocated to an extra care scheme were different to those required for a general housing scheme. The Group Manager for Planning and Housing said that, generally speaking, parking requirements for people requiring care in their own homes, (and therefore not living independently), were not as high as those for people living in normal conditions. Several members continued to express their concerns, including Councillor Norman Stephens, who believed 42 parking spaces at this site was unsatisfactory, particularly when taking in to account parking requirements for visitors.

Responding to concerns about density, the Group Manager for Planning and Housing said that the proposals for this scheme were different to those proposed in 2007. In response to a question about what safeguards might be introduced to ensure local people benefited from the scheme, the Strategic Housing Manager said that applicants with a local connection would be given first priority. He also said that the proportion of people without a local connection coming to live in the district was less than 10 per cent.

Vote

Councillor Roger Yeates moved the revised recommendation and Councillor Paul McMahon seconded the motion. A recorded vote was taken and members,

RESOLVED that delegated authority be given to the Group Manager for Planning and Housing and to the Group Manager for Legal and Democratic to grant permission subject to; the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement or unilateral undertaking to secure 40 per cent extra care properties as affordable housing; those applicants for the affordable housing who demonstrate a local connection to Newent to be given first preference, and to the conditions referred to in the schedule of applications, (condition 13 - as amended), and to additional condition (14) as detailed in the late material. If an appropriate agreement or unilateral obligation is not secured by 13 March 2012, delegated authority to be given to the Group Manager for Planning and Housing to refuse the application.

For (13)

Councillors James Bevan, Gethyn Davies, Frankie Evans, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Brian Jones, Paul McMahon, Graham Morgan, Norman Stephens, Lynn Sterry, Arthur Thomas, David Thompson and Roger Yeates.

Abstentions (1) Councillor Philip Burford

Against (0)