Issue - meetings

To consider a report on the withdrawal or progression of planning submission for the above sites.

The Sub-Committee considered a report on whether to progress the planning submissions for the above developments.

One question was received from Mr Nigel Rowe in relation to this item:

“The Sub-Committee is asked to decide whether to withdraw certain Council planning applications, including for Thameside House and the Oast House, on the grounds that their proposed heights and densities do not have the support of the majority of Councillors and that if these schemes were rejected by the Planning Committee it might make the sites “less attractive to future delivery partners”. Can Members please confirm that flood risk and the Environment Agency’s long-standing position relating directly to these sites, particularly Thameside House, are also principal and critical considerations?”

Response from the Chair:

“As part of any planning application ensuring appropriate flood mitigation for the site is included is a key part of the design. Flood Risk Assessments must be undertaken, and appropriate flood mitigation included within scheme design as part of the application criteria. The Council employ specialist flood consultants to produce these mitigation measures for inclusion within the application and address the flood risk applicable, which will differ on a site-by-site basis.

The Environment Agency are a statutory consultee as part of the determination process and will review the proposals made and provide advice to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) accordingly. Therefore, ensuring an appropriate flood consultant is part of the design team is a principle and critical consideration for the remit of this Sub-Committee, however it is for the LPA and not this Sub-Committee to be satisfied that all critical risks associated with the flooding on the application site have been fully addressed.”

The Group Head – Assets introduced the report and explained that the recommendation was that applications for Thameside House, Oast House and Benwell House Phase Two should be withdrawn as there was a lack of support from Councillors due to the proposed height and mass of the schemes. The application for Ashford Multi-Storey Car Park should be progressed as the majority of Councillors supported the development and had been more involved in the scheme design.

The Sub-Committee queried the status of the outstanding budget for the three schemes proposed for withdrawal. The Group Head – Assets advised that any remaining budget would be put towards any new proposals for those sites. The value of the outstanding budgets would be communicated to the Sub-Committee outside of the meeting.

The Sub-Committee were informed that if the Sub-Committee approved the recommendations, the LPA would be advised that the submissions would be withdrawn. Any relevant design work and surveys could be used to support new applications for the sites.

The Sub-Committee resolved to:

1. Approve the withdrawal of the current Thameside House planning submission.
2. Approve the withdrawal of the current Oast House planning submission.
3. Approve the withdrawal of the current Benwell Phase 2 planning submission.

4.    Approve the progression of the current Ashford Multi Storey Car Park planning submission for determination.