PL/25/0354/FA Boveney Court Farm, Boveney Road, Dorney, Buckinghamshire (part 5 of 6)

This is not an easy decision and I would like to be clear that I have given careful consideration to the additional information that the officers have provided and also the advice provided by them since the last meeting, including the explanation around the recent appeal decisions where inspectors have accepted reduced affordable housing provisions on viability grounds. I mean, I do fully recognise that there might be an appeal risk here and I do not take that lightly. However, I think that members are still required to exercise planning judgement. This is why we're here as committee members. And in my case, in my view, I think this is one of the cases where the balance is genuinely really finely poised. The golden rules were introduced, in my opinion, to secure clear and meaningful public benefits, particularly in realms of grey belt locations. In this case, the proposal, I think, in my view, produces a significant shortfall against the 50 % requirement. So while the viability evidence explains why the requirement cannot be met, it does not still, in my opinion, remove the fact that the proposal remains in clear conflict with the golden rules. Therefore, for me, the difficulty lies in the weight that is given to the golden rules. I am not persuaded that the failure to meet the golden rules has been afforded sufficient weight in the overall planning balance, particularly given the importance attached to them when this policy was adopted. This is therefore a tough call and I accept that reasonable people and members and colleagues of this committee may come to a different view. But in my opinion, having weighed the evidence carefully, I do not consider the benefits of the scheme outweighs its failure to comply with the golden rules. And for that reason, I'm unable to support the application. Thank you, Chairman. Councillor Ashman, do you want to come in? I'll amend there a couple of points. Thank you.