Agenda item

Redevelopment to form 53 Assisted Living Extra Care apartments for older persons including communal facilities, associated car parking and landscaping.

Councillor Joan Bland, one of the local ward councillors, stepped down from the committee and took no part in the debate or voting on this item.

The committee considered application P16/S0720/FUL for a redevelopment to form 53 assisted living extra care apartments for older people including communal facilities, associated car parking and landscaping at 345 Reading Road, Henley-on-Thames.

Consultations, representations, policy and guidance and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

Julian Brookes, Mayor and Chair of Henley town council, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The application is contrary to the Joint Henley and Harpsden Neighbourhood Plan, specifically policies HO4 and HO5; and to economic growth;

·         Over 300 affordable homes are needed in the area to meet the needs of those who cannot afford to live in the area, including those who either wish or have to move on from the Henley YMCA;

·         The 16-29 age group is under-represented in the area and the 66-90 age group is over-represented – housing therefore needs to be provided to cater for the former group to retain and bring them to the area; and

·         There is full employment in the area, so the employment aspect of the site should be given negative weight.

Jim Munro, Trevor Howell and Jennifer Wood, three local residents, spoke objecting to the application. Their concerns included the following:

·         The air source heat pump is very noisy and should be checked;

·         The mix of housing does not meet the reach of different income groups and is therefore contrary to policy;

·         Remaining sites in the neighbourhood plan will need to overcompensate for the lack of affordable housing; and

·         No CIL contributions will open the floodgates to prospective developers proposing care homes.

Martin Brown, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support of the application. His speech included the following:

·         The applicants identified a need for extra care assisted living and are the leading developer of care homes;

·         17 new jobs will be created;

·         Homes like this will put less pressure on hospitals;

·         There is a projected increase of 355,000 of households with a member over the age of 65 per year;

·         The applicant has offered a voluntary community contribution; and

·         There are no technical reasons not to approve the application.

Stefan Gawrysiak, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application. His concerns included the following:

·         The Henley and Harpsden neighbourhood plan require 40% affordable housing for all new developments;

·         No CIL contributions;

·         12,179 people have voted for the Neighbourhood Plan;

·         John Howell MP has stated that the application conflicts with national and district policies;

·         There is a demographic imbalance, which needs to be addressed; and

·         Two further similar developments are proposed in the area.

Joan Bland, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application. Her concerns included the following:

·         There are two care homes in Henley and two in Wargrave with vacancies.

Lorraine Hillier, one of the local ward members, spoke objecting to the application.

The committee considered the application, with advice from officers where appropriate; the discussion included the following points:

·         Although the committee expressed some concerns about the conflict with the objectives of the adopted neighbourhood plan, there is no allocation for the specific type of housing in the plan;

·         The development would release properties further down the housing ladder;

·         Concern that the application does not meet housing needs; and

·         Planning harm was not identified that could form the basis of a refusal reason.

A motion, moved and seconded, to refuse the application was declared lost on being put to the vote with the Chairman’s casting vote.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was declared carried on being put to the vote with the Chairman’s casting vote.

RESOLVED: to delegate authority to the head of planning to grant planning permission for application P16/S0720/FUL, subject to:

i.        The prior completion of a Section 106 agreement to secure contributions as detailed in the officer’s report.

ii.        The following conditions:

1.    Commencement three years- full planning permission.

2.    Approved plans.

3.    Restriction on use - class C2.

4.    Slab and ridge levels to be agreed.

5.    All sample materials to be agreed.

6.    Sample wall panel of materials to be agreed.

7.    Landscaping (access/hard standings/fencing/walls) to be confirmed.

8.    Tree pits to be agreed.

9.    Vision splay to be agreed.

10.Car parking details.

11.Travel plan.

12.Construction travel management plan to be agreed.

13.Surface water drainage works to be agreed.

14.Decontamination works to be verified by the Council.

15.External lighting to be agreed.

16.Ait quality modelling and mitigation to be agreed.

17.Protection of trees during development.

18.Access details.

19.No surface water drainage to the highway.

20.Cycle parking details.

21.Bins storage details.

22.Noise controls.

23.Foul drainage works.

24.Ecology mitigation.

25.Hours of construction.