Agenda and minutes

To receive any declarations of interest.

The following declarations of interest were made:

Application 22/00900/FUL – 42-44 Barbourne Road

(Minute No. 113)

Councillors Barnes and Lewing – As local Ward Members.  Both Councillors elected to speak and vote on the item.

The following declaration of other disclosable interest was made:

Application 22/00900/FUL – 42-44 Barbourne Road

(Minute No. 113)

Councillor Desayrah – As a local resident objecting to the proposal.  Councillor Desayrah had registered to speak under Agenda Item 7, Public Representations.  Councillor Desayrah left the room during the consideration of this item.

Of the meeting held on 23^rd March 2023 to be approved and signed.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd March 2023 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

That the minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel be received (5^th April 2023).

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel be received.

Such inspections of current application sites as may have been recommended by Officers and as may be approved by the Committee.

Members of the Committee should inform the Development Services Manager of any requests for site visits by 5.00 p.m. on the Tuesday immediately prior to the meeting ( date  ) and reasons for the request.

Site visits will be conducted in accordance with the procedure attached which forms part of the Council’s Good Practice Protocol for Members and Officers dealing with Planning Matters.

The Committee had visited the following site which was the subject of an application to be determined, prior to the commencement of the meeting:

Application 22/00900/HP – 42-44 Barbourne Road

Up to a total of fifteen minutes can be allowed, each speaker being allocated a maximum of five minutes, for members of the public to present a petition, ask a question or comment on any matter on the Agenda or within the remit of the Committee in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 10.

None.

Members of the public will be allowed to address the Committee in respect of applications to be considered by the Committee in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 11. Members of the public will address the Committee during the Committee’s consideration of the respective item.

Those representations made are recorded at the minute to which they relate.

The Corporate Director - Planning and Governance recommends that the Planning Committee grants planning permission subject to:-

i)            The applicant and all parties with an interest in the land entering into a S106 Agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms annexed as Appendix 1 to this report, no later than six months from the date of this resolution; and

ii)           the recommended conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Introduction

The Committee considered an application for the demolition of an existing Church Hall and the erection of a four storey building to provide 54 bed student accommodation with associated communal amenity space, landscaping, car/cycle parking and refuse storage at St Clement’s Church Hall, Henwick Road.

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

The application had been referred to Planning Committee as it is outside the scope of the adopted Scheme of Delegation.

Report/Background/Late Papers

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the site itself, relevant policies, planning history and representations and consultations where applicable.  The draft Heads of Terms for a Section 106 Agreement were attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

Subsequent to the previous Planning Committee meeting on 23^rd March 2023 the applicants had provided further supporting information ahead of the reconsideration by Officers and Members.  A letter dated 30^th March 2023 sent by the applicants referred to management of the proposed building and associated operations in connection with the proposed use of the site as student accommodation, with the letter setting out management measures, which were summarised in paragraph 1.4 of the report.

The report was presented to Committee Members with updated sections in respect of additional information received.

The Committee’s attention was drawn to the late paper which related to an additional condition requesting a bat survey including mitigation and enhancement plan to be submitted.

The Service Manager – Development Management informed Committee Members that a contribution by the NHS Acute Trust would not be sought as outlined in paragraphs 7.105-7.116.

Officer Presentation

The information was presented as set out by the Corporate Director – Planning and Governance, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation.  Committee Members were shown 2 further photo montages of the site that had not been shown at the previous meeting.

Public Representations

The following people had registered to speak on the application:

John Williams and Peter James (Agent for the applicant)

A local Ward Member, Councillor Udall also addressed the Committee.

Key Points of Debate

·         The Local Ward member continued to oppose the proposal stating that the four storey block would overshadow and over dominate neighbouring buildings.  Issues raised previously were still of concern to him and residents and asked that extra conditions be considered to avoid noise and disruption, limiting hours of working and no evenings or weekends.   The Ward Member asked that the Committee refuse the application.

·         The agent for the applicant and the Managing Director of the company for the construction and management of the project addressed the Committee.  They responded to questions from Committee Members relating to the parking management process and how this would be enforced; provision of on-site security rather than a 24 hour helpline and the possibility of using the 3 car parking spaces for a car club and disability spaces.

·         In response to comments by Committee Members on paragraph 3.7 ‘car free’, the County Council Highways representative clarified this and the cycle parking provision.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112.

The Corporate Director - Planning and Governance recommends that the Planning Committee grants planning permission subject to:-

i)    The applicant and all parties with an interest in the land entering into a S106 Agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms annexed as Appendix 1 to this report, no later than six months from the date of this resolution; and

ii)   the recommended conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Introduction

The Committee considered an application for the conversion ad extension of two existing guest houses into 12 self-contained apartments at 42-44 Barbourne Road.

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

The application had been referred to Planning Committee as a major development.

Report/Background/Late Papers

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the site itself, relevant policies, planning history and representations and consultations where applicable.  The draft Heads of Terms for a Section 106 Agreement were attached as Appendix 1 to the report.

The application was subject to revisions during the application review process, based on the advice of officers, with the revisions outlined in the report.

The Committee’s attention was drawn to the late papers which related to an additional condition relating to the submission of a Construction Environmental Management Plan and to the amendment of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Appendix 1, draft Heads of Terms.

Officer Presentation

The information was presented as set out by the Corporate Director – Planning and Governance, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation.

Public Representations

The following people had registered to speak on the application:

Tom Neale and Jill Desayrah (Objectors on behalf of Saint George’s Square Residents’ Association)

Key Points of Debate

·         The objectors who registered to speak, spoke on behalf of the Saint George’s Residents’ Association, who had also submitted a formal written objection.  The summary of their objections related to overdevelopment, design and amenity, parking and bins.  On behalf of the Saint George’s Residents’ Association they asked that the Committee refuse the application.  There were no questions for the objectors from Committee Members.

·         Concerns were raised by Committee Members over the accommodation, particularly the basement, which had no natural light or ventilation.  The development was seen as a house in multiple occupation (HMO).  In response the Service Manager – Development Management confirmed that the basement did not have natural light but light wells.  In terms of the development being an HMO, the Article 4 Direction was referred to which prevented properties from across the city becoming one without planning permission, this is not one.

·         In terms of the accommodation it was commented that the 1 bed apartments could be occupied by 2 people in which case this would affect space standards and asked if this could be conditioned.  The Service Manager – Development Management stated that this could not be conditioned.  The space standards were designed for 1 person 1 apartment, if 2 people chose to occupy them it would be their choice.

·         Reference was made to paragraph 8.10 of the report which identified that the housing layout and associated mix has been revised on the advice of officers and is attributed limited to positive weight in the planning balance.

·         The Committee’s attention was drawn to an anomaly in the ground floor plans by the Head of Planning.  It was highlighted that the cross section does show that as part of the proposal there will be excavation to the front master  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.

The Corporate Director - Planning and Governance recommends that the Planning Committee grant planning permission subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of this report.

Introduction

The Committee considered and application for retrospective permission for the retention of a timber-framed residential annexe for ancillary use and demolition of a detached garage at 93 Penhill Crescent.

Reason Why Being Considered by Planning Committee

The application had been referred to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Udall.

Report/Background/Late Papers

The report set out the background to the proposal, the site and surrounding area, the site itself, relevant policies, planning history and representations and consultations where applicable.

There were no late papers circulated.

Officer Presentation

The information was presented as set out by the Corporate Director – Planning and Governance, in conjunction with a powerpoint presentation.

Public Representations

There had been no one registered to speak on the application,  However, the local Ward Member, Councillor Udall addressed the Committee.

Key Points of Debate

·         The local Ward Member in addressing the Committee stated that there were no issues related to parking and had spoken to the applicant and objectors.  He hoped a compromise could be reached and sought the support of the Committee for additional conditions.

·         To soften the impact on the visual element of the building a condition requesting timber cladding was made.  Concerns had been raised regarding drainage and rainwater collection/dispersal and a condition for guttering on the building attached to a water butt was requested.  With regard to the use of the building concerns had been raised with regard to private rental opportunities and asked that this be conditioned not to allow this.

·         The Service Manager – Development Management stated that condition 6 covered the use of the building but would review the wording to ensure it is robust enough as some Members had concerns over the intended use.

·         Paragraph 3.3 of report was referred to and it was asked why there were no utilities in the proposed annexe.  The Deputy Service Manager – Development Management confirmed that it was connected to the host property.

The Service Manager – Development Management summarised the amendments to conditions as follows.

·         Cladding to be timber (amended condition);

·         Drainage scheme to include guttering and water but (amended condition); and

·         Review of wording regarding occupancy condition.

There being no further points made the Chair requested the voting of each Member of the Committee who was eligible to vote.  Following the recording of the votes the proposal to approve was agreed as follows, subject to the amended conditions as referred to above.

For – 9

Against – 1

Abstentions - 0

RESOLVED: That the Committee

1.      grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in section 9 of the report, and to the amendment of conditions 3, 5 and 6; and

2.      delegate authority to the Corporate Director – Planning and Governance, subject to consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning Committee, to confirm the final wording of the above conditions and issue the Decision Notice.

Which in the opinion of the Chair is of sufficient urgency as to warrant consideration.

None.