Agenda item

            That planning permission be granted subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation, requiring that before the property is offered for sale on the open market, the Council or a Registered Social Landlord (RSL) shall be given the option to purchase it at full market value, should the Council or RSL have identified a need for such a specialised or adapted property. (In the case of any dispute the full market value at the time of sale shall be established by the District Valuer), and subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Head of Planning.

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Planning in respect of this application.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.

            The Development Manager explained that this application followed an appeal against the refusal of a similar application in 2011 which was dismissed by the Inspectorate.  The site was outside the settlement boundary but was considered to comply with the infill policy HSG5 requirements as it was set within a row of dwellings where there was a clearly identifiable group of houses within a continuously developed frontage.  The application was considered primarily as an infill plot with the additional context of close care accommodation provision for the applicant’s daughter.  Policy HSG5 provision was made for limited infill, subject to the criterion that it was for a proven local housing need.  At the appeal, the Inspector had suggested that if the applicant entered into a Section 106 legal obligation to offer the property back to the Council or a Registered Social Landlord if the property should come up for sale, on a first refusal basis, he would have allowed the appeal.  On this application, the applicant had agreed to enter into the Section 106 obligation to provide for the property to be offered back to the Council for full market value, which recognised the cost to the applicant of providing the dwelling.  

            Councillor R.C. Bithell proposed the recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  He said that he was intrigued as to why the applicant was so vehemently opposed to the condition that it should be offered to a Registered Social Landlord or the Council for someone in a similar situation.  He highlighted paragraph 7.05 which reported that this would only occur if there was at the time an identifiable need for such a specialised or adapted property.  If this was not the case, the applicant could sell the property on the open market.  Councillor H.G. Roberts raised concern at the application and said that he felt that it was finely balanced between approval and refusal. 

            The Planning Strategy Manager said that policy HSG5 within the UDP was not just about infill as the Inspector had stated that, within the policy, provision was made for limited infill, subject to the criterion that it was for a proven local need.  The Committee had resolved to grant planning permission in October 2010 subject to the conditions in the report and to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement.  The applicant had not signed the agreement as he thought that the property had to be offered at a reduced rate.  He was not happy to do this due to the cost of the adaptations but he had now agreed to sign the Agreement as the property would be offered at full market value.  

            RESOLVED:

            That planning permission be granted subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation, requiring that before the property is offered for sale on the open market, the Council or a Registered Social Landlord (RSL) shall be given the option to purchase it at full market value, should the Council or RSL have identified a need for such a specialised or adapted property. (In the case of any dispute the full market value at the time of sale shall be established by the District Valuer), and subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Head of Planning.

            Councillor P.G. Heesom indicated that he wished it to be recorded in the minutes that he had voted against the granting of permission.