Agenda item

                        The Planning Officer reported that with regard to Condition C3 which was the affordable housing condition at point (i) it should be amended to read: “rounded to the nearest whole number of units” and not rounded up.  So if it was 10.1 to 10.4 it would be 10 and if it was 10.5 to 10.9 it would be 11. 

Secondly Condition 19 which related to the flood risk assessment should be amended to read “the discharging into the Thames Water sewer would be restricted to no greater than 15 litres per second so essentially was just adding “no greater than”.  This was essentially to ensure that the drainage condition does not require a discharge range of 15 litres per second.  This proposal will actually achieve a lower and better rate so essentially an improvement upon on that requirement and that the condition is the maximum. 

Paragraph 7.9.6 requires 16% biodiversity net gain but as a point of clarification it is 18.16 area of habitat gained. 

With regards to the tilted balance which is not specifically referenced in the report but relevant to note that in the absence of 5 year housing land supply presumption in favour of sustainable development applies and that planning permission should be granted unless there are any adverse impacts of doing so that would significantly or demonstrable outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole. 

Another point raised by the officer for Members was with regard to the history of the site and that outline planning permission was previously granted for up to 70 dwellings and a 75 bed care home.  Subsequently to that outline planning permission this Committee considered a reserved matters application for approval of details for the residential care home element.  Essentially that outline permission required the reserve matters for the residential element to be submitted by a date of 14 September 2021 but had not been done so essentially this was a new outline application to refresh the residential element of the scheme.  However it is an outline application so would still require a subsequent reserve matters application to be submitted for consideration in due course.

                        Councillor Stephen King sought clarification on the entrance and any new entrance.  Would the access be two vehicle wide?

The Planning Officer advised that there were two existing vehicular access points into the site and one existing pedestrian access.  The application included alterations to the existing vehicular access arrangements to essentially create one new vehicular access in addition to a pedestrian drop kerb.  So there would be one vehicular access.  The access met the requirements of Hertfordshire County Council as the Highways Authority who raised no objections to the application.  Access was the only detail that is provided at this outline stage with other matters reserved. 

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(b) a member of the public in support of the application.

Councillor Stephen King sought clarification of the officers on whether the application was in Gosforth Lane or Northwick Road as the speaker had mentioned it was Northwick Road twice. 

The Chair advised it was Gosforth Lane. 

The Planning Officer advised that the site is in Gosforth Lane and would be accessed from Gosforth Lane.

Councillor Keith Martin moved, seconded by Councillor David Raw that outline planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the officer report with the amendments to Conditions 3 and 19. 

                        On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being 10 For, 0 Against and 1 Abstention.

                        RESOLVED:

                        That outline planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the officer report with the amendments to Conditions 3 and 19.