Agenda and draft minutes

There were no declarations made.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Frank Jonas, Lee Mason and John Ferrett. Councillor Ken Ferrett was in attendance for Councillor John Ferrett. Apologies were also received from Councillors Donna Jones and April Windebank who were unable to attend as standing deputies.

The minutes of the Planning Committee held on 26 February 2014 are attached.

RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 26 February 2014 be agreed and signed by the chair as a correct record.

(TAKE IN MINUTES)

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 26 February 2014 were agreed and signed by the chair as a correct record.

There were no updates.

Purpose

To advise the committee of the outcome of the appeal, which was allowed.

Recommended that members note the report.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Purpose

To advise the committee of the outcome of the appeal, which was allowed.

Recommended that the report is noted.

Planning applications

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Conversion of building to form 3 flats.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported in the supplementary matters list that written deputations opposing the application had been received from ward Councillors Terry Hall and Matthew Winnington were attached as appendices to the list.

A deputation was heard from Mr Stainton, objecting to the application, who included the following points in his representations;

·         Property has been used as unauthorised HMO for years;

·         Residents and ward councillors have been seeking enforcement action but PCC will not take any action;

·         In light of the application would now like to see enforcement action taken against the unauthorised use.

A deputation was also heard from ward Councillor Luke Stubbs who included the following points in his representations;

·         Parking is a concern;

·         This property only includes 2 parking spaces;

·         My view and the majority of residents is to keep the wall;

·         Losing the wall means losing half of a space and only gaining one space off road;

·         Would ask that the committee request regular updates on the enforcement action as the situation needs to be monitored.

Members' questions

Members sought clarification on the number of parking spaces being provided on the site and whether there was sufficient room to maneuvere in and out of the site safely.

Members' comments

Members recognised that the conversion of other properties into flats has created parking pressures in the area and were in favour of enforcement action to be taken if planning permission is not implemented.

RESOLVED that subject to the completion by the applicant of a unilateral undertaking to provide an appropriate contribution towards mitigation measures in connection with the Solent Special Protection Areas SPD following its adoption, grant conditional permission, also subject to the conditions outlined within the City Development Managers report.

The City Development Manager agreed to write to the applicant seeking confirmation as to when the planning permission would be implemented. Dependent on the response, a judgement will then be made as to whether it is appropriate to instigate enforcement action.

Construction of boundary wall and anti-climb feature.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported in the supplementary matters list that since the committee report was published, one further objection had been received and two further support comments had been received. These express concern regarding the issues that were listed in the committee report and do not raise any new issues. A detailed cross section of the proposed boundary wall was received on 24 March 2014.

A deputation was heard from Mr Hillier, in support of the application, who included the following points in his representations;

·         Live in Brecon House and am also chair of the residents' association, who very much support this project;

·         This will reduce foot traffic in the residential area which will reduce noise for residents;

·         Since the fence has been put up this has helped but it is unsightly.

Members' questions

Members sought clarification as to whom had erected the fence, where the anti-climb feature was to be and where the black bricks were to be as part of the wall.

Members' comments

Members did raise concern that further applications like this could lead to the area becoming a gated community.

RESOLVED that conditional permission be granted subject to the conditions outlined within the City Development Managers report.

Construction of single storey rear extension.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

This application was brought to the Planning Committee for determination as the applicant is a close relation of a council employee.

RESOLVED that authority be delegated to the City Development Manager to grant conditional permission following the expiration of the effective date (28 March 2014), subject to no representations being received, and subject to the conditions outlined within the City Development Managers report.

Construction of 143 dwellings with associated landscaping, parking and access.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported in the supplementary matters list that the Section 106 Agreement provisions listed on page 33 of the committee report refers to "upon occupation" of 50^th (open market) dwelling and should read "prior to disposal".

A deputation was heard from Miss Altman, on behalf of the applicants agent, who included the following points in her representations;

·         SSE have been winding down on the site for a number of years and are moving elsewhere in the city;

·         There will be no employment loss with SSE leaving the site;

·         The development provides family and social housing;

·         The new flood modelling has shown that the site will be safe during its lifetime;

·         This is a positive development and provides a positive contribution to the housing need.

Members' questions

Members sought clarification on whether the access to Drayton Park would be gated and requested details of the main access onto the site.

Members' comments

Members welcomed the development although did raise concern about the impact on the only doctors surgery in Drayton and on Springfield Secondary School. Members were also pleased to see the amount of 'greenery' within the development, including a small children's play area, and were impressed to see that all the dwellings had gardens.

RESOLVED that

I)             Delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to grant conditional permission subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the inclusion of an appropriate level of mitigation, the scale of which will be confirmed in the adopted Solent Special Protection Areas SPD (so there will not be a significant effect on the SPAs).

II)            Delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to add/amend conditions where necessary.

III)           Delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to refuse planning permission if the legal agreement has not be completed within three months of the date of the resolution.