Agenda and minutes

These had been received from Councillor Ken Ellcome, who was represented by Councillor Robert New as his standing deputy.

Councillor New declared a personal, non-pecuniary interest on planning application item 11 as two of his close friends work for Remarkable. 

Councillor Vernon-Jackson advised with regard to planning application item 5, that he had been in extensive conversations with the some of the neighbours about this application.  He therefore made the decision to leave the room when this application was discussed. 

Councillor Jonas advised with regard to planning application item 5, that his Grandson has recently signed to Pickwick Football Club.  He therefore made the decision to leave the room when this application was discussed

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 6 August 2014 are attached.

RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meetings held on 6 August 2014 are agreed as a correct record to be signed by the Chair accordingly.

(TAKE IN MINUTES)

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 6 August 2014 were agreed and should be signed by the chair as a correct record. 

Planning Applications

There were no updates. 

Planning Applications

The chair asked that the order of items to be considered be varied due to the number of people wishing to make a deputation on planning application item 6, 149 Albert Road, therefore this item was taken first.  It was also agreed to move those items with no deputation requests to the end of the agenda. 

Change of use from class D2 (assembly and leisure use) to class A4 (drinking establishment) on ground floor with sui-generis lap dancing venue on first floor.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager's supplementary matters report explained that 46 additional representations including those from Councillors Andrewes, Hunt, Adair and Winnington, had been received objecting to the proposals on the grounds outlined in the report.

A petition with 50 signatures opposing the proposals has been submitted by the Albert Road Traders Association.

29 additional representations, the majority in a standard form, have been received in support of the proposals requesting that the application be considered on its individual merits rather than moral objections. 

An on-line petition objecting to the proposals, instigated by Cllr Andrewes, had collected 320 signatures, a copy was attached as an Appendix to the list.   A further six have since signed the petition as at 4:30pm today. 

The following deputations were heard:

Ms Dracke, attending to represent the Solent Feminist Network whose points included

·         The vast majority of local residents are against this application.

·         A lap dancing club is not appropriate for Albert Road. 

·         Lap dancing clubs promote the wrong message that women's' bodies can be sold.

·         It would intimidate some women and girls and may create a fear of going near that part of Albert Road, particularly at night.

·         The proposed location is in close proximity to two schools which is not appropriate. 

Ms Dillon, attending to represent Aurora New Dawn Ltd whose points included

·         Fully endorses the Council's Sex Establishment Policy and the council's preliminary conclusion that there is no place within Portsmouth in which it would be appropriate to licence a sex establishment.

·         A woman's body is not a commodity to be bought and sold.

·         Albert Road is used by families therefore inappropriate use for area.

·         The club owners provide escorts for the dancers to their vehicles at the end of the night, highlighting there is a risk of attack.

·         The proposed site is located next to Wedgewood Rooms, who have under 18's nights therefore wholly inappropriate for them to be near this activity.

·         It would be contrary to licensing policy.  

Ms Catlow, attending to represent the Albert Road traders whose points included

·         Local traders fear being 'leered' at by the customers of the club.

·         Worries that the traders will have to pay for policing of the area due to potential increase of antisocial behaviour.

·         Albert Road contains a diverse mix of shops bringing added interest to the city and a lap dancing club would spoil this.

A deputation was made by Mr Weymes, the applicant's agent whose points included:

·         The Council's Environmental Health Officer had received no reports of noise for the applicant's other two clubs located in the city. There was no reason why the environmental impact of the club in its new location would be greater.

·         He was convinced that the management style will ensure that noise complaints would be minimal. 

·         The property was formerly occupied by Southsea Conservative Club and has never been used for retail use.

A deputation was also heard from adjacent ward Councillor Michael  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.

Siting of storage containers, portable toilet and 2 metre high fence and gates for a temporary period of up to 18 months.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

Councillors Frank Jonas and Gerald Vernon-Jackson withdrew from the room due to their declarations of interest.

The City Development Manager reported that since publication of the Planning Committee reports, 25 letters of representation had been received in support of the proposal on the following grounds: (a) The proposal would be to the benefit of the local community; (b) The proposal would support the largest community football club within the city; (c) The proposal would provide important recreational facilities for young people; and (d) The proposal would benefit the bid to become the City of Football.

In addition, it has been brought to the attention of the Local Planning Authority that members of the public were unable to register their support for this application online. It is known that there have been technical issues with the online registration system over the past few dates and measures have been put in place to rectify this issue. Unfortunately it is not known how many people were unable to make representations on this application during this period of unavailability.

A deputation was heard from Mrs Lovell, objecting to the application, who included the following points in her representation

·         This is the wrong development in the wrong place.

·         Acknowledgement that there is a need for the football club to find an alternative venue.

·         Procedural concerns were raised that the supporting comments were submitted past the deadline, yet still considered.  Also that the planning application was not advertised enough and the posters omitted the proposal for a portable toilet.

·         Concerns that the condition of the pitch will deteriorate.

·         The area of the pitch the application relates to often becomes waterlogged in the winter.

·         Concerns how the lorries will be able to access the portable toilet to empty this, particularly when the ground is soft.

·         Suggestion that the proposal could be located on the overflow car park which would not have an effect on the SSSI.

·         The temporary storage containers may attract vandalism as the area is poorly lit.

A deputation was heard from Mr Gibson MBE, objecting to the application, who included the following points in his representation

·         Aware of the importance of sport and sympathetic that the club have been displaced and need to find a new venue.

·         Concerns raised on the design and overbearing appearance of the proposal.

·         This is the worst possible location in the park for this proposal as this is the most used part of the park.  There are two other sides of the park where this would be better suited. 

·         Concerns over the smell of the portable toilet.

A deputation was heard also from Mr Scott who spoke on behalf of the applicant and raised the following points in his representation

·         The area was chosen as it is convenient for the car park, easy to reach and suits their need.

·         Acknowledged that it is not ideal to have a portable toilet on the site, however there was no other toilets nearby they  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

Application to vary condition 1 of planning permission A*12983/AA to increase the maximum number of pre-school aged children accommodated on site from 24 to 36.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported that The East Solent Coastal Partnership had commented on the proposal as follows;-

The site is shown to be within the Flood Zone 3 of the Environment Agency's Flood Maps. The site lies within the Portsea Island North flood cell as identified in the Portsea Island Coastal Defence Strategy. This area is covered by the Interim Position between Portsmouth City Council and the Environment Agency for the provision of flood defences in this cell. This agreement assumes that the flood risk management infrastructure will be provided to at least the 1:200 year standard of protection by the time that it is required.

Mr Penfold, Group Scout Leader at the 54^th Scout Group, made a deputation and included the following points in his representation

·         The Scout Group had done a great deal of work recently improving the premises including a new floor and unisex toilets.

·         He had met with neighbours who had all said they had no objections to the increase in the number of children but had some concerns on the safety of the pre-school children when arriving and leaving the premises.

·         There is a private walkway and if parents used this route this would resolve the concerns.

·         Allowing 12 extra children would not mean there would be 12 extra cars and lot of children walk there with their parents.

·         The Scout Group want to ensure the safety of the children. 

Councillor Sanders, made a deputation as ward councillor and included the following points in his representation

·         He had spoken to local residents and reported that everyone spoken to had agreed that there is an issue with the access to the premises; however nobody wanted to stop the pre-school from being allowed to increase the number of children.

·         There is an issue with parents parking in front of resident's garages to drop off their children and also people parking overnight in this area and this issue needs to be addressed. The pre-school will write to parents to ask them not to park in front of garages. 

·         He suggested that double yellow lines be painted on the roadside of the garages to stop parking here and also a mirror be placed on the bend of the access road to increased visibility for drivers.

The City Development Manager advised the committee that if members considered that it was necessary to refuse the application unless the suggested conditions put forward by Councillor Sanders were imposed, that the application would need to be deferred to examine whether such a scheme could be agreed, as it is not possible to grant an application subject to these being put in place when they had not been considered fully. 

Members' Questions

Members asked whether the entrance way was wide enough to place bollards to create a separate walkway alongside the road.  Officers advised that there would not be sufficient space for bollards as this would restrict access for residents wishing to access  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

External alterations to include new windows, rooflights and doors to facilitate conversion to form five flats, removal of external fire escape staircase, re-construction of sun-room to front elevation, construction of sunken patio to front and provision of on-site car parking facilities after infilling swimming pool (resubmission of 14/00456/FUL).

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager introduced the report. 

Mr Knight made a deputation as the applicant's agent and raised the following points in his representation

·         The property had previously been divided into three flats and the proposal was to create five high quality flats.

·         There is space for cars around the property and unrestricted on street parking available.

·         An area had been identified to use for bin storage. 

Councillor Stubbs made a deputation as ward councillor and raised the following points in his representation

·         The property had a lot of character which it was important to preserve.

·         He had no objections to the sub division of the property.

·         Some of the neighbours had raised concerns about parking provision; however the applicant proposed to have parking at the front of the property which was out of keeping in a conservation area. 

Members' Questions

Members asked whether the front was completely paved as there was concern regarding the run off pressure on drains.  It was confirmed that approximately 90% of the front would be paved.  Members' agreed that an additional condition should be included that a permeable membrane be used.  Members sought clarification that the windows and doors would be a like for like replacement, which officers confirmed. 

RESOLVED that the application be granted conditional permsision subject to the conditions set out in the City Development Manager's reportand an additional condition relating to surfacing of the parking area.

Construction of a building part 7 / part 9 / part 17 / part 25 storeys comprising a halls of residence (class c1) for students containing 836 study / bedrooms and the construction of 1,249 sqm of floorspace for use as storage units (class b8) on part of ground floor and associated landscaping, after the demolition of existing buildings.

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported in the supplementary matters list that having regard to the provision of policy PCS19 in respect of the provision of affordable housing and minimum space standards, the provision of policy PCS17 and the Parking Standards and Transport Assessments SPD, and the terms of the proposed Section 111 agreement (to secure the planning obligations) in this particular case, it is considered that a planning condition to restrict occupation of the 836 study bedrooms in the Halls of Residence to 'temporary residential accommodation for a student during his or her period of study' (unless otherwise agreed in writing with by the Local Planning Authority), is necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms and would be both directly related to the development and be fairly and reasonably related in scale to the development.

Mr Bhogal of Unite Group plc made a deputation.  He was joined by Mr Cooley of Cooley Architects, Mr Ford of WSP Group and Mr Roe of CgMs Consulting who were present to answer any questions.  Mr Bhogal made the following points in his deputation:

·         The Unite Group provide high quality, secure accommodation for accommodation for 41,000 students within the UK.

·         Detailed pre application discussions had taken place prior to submitting the proposal.

·         The site is currently underused and is ideal due to its proximity to the university campus and to transport links.

·         The layout of the student rooms had been agreed by Portsmouth University.

·         If approved this would enhance the local economy.

·         The building would be highly sustainable with a BREEAM standard of excellent.

Councillor Stubbs made a deputation as Cabinet Member for Planning, Regeneration and Economic Development.  He made the following points in his representation:

·         Portsmouth City Council should support the University of Portsmouth as one of the major employers in the city.

·         There is a housing shortage in the south east and creating 836 additional bedrooms for students would free up properties for the private rented sector.

·         Most first year students would choose to live in halls of residence.  Therefore more halls of residence are needed in the city to provide enough rooms to offer all first years a place in halls to allow the university to compete against other universities.

·         The proposed location is ideal for a tall building and it is not too near a residential area.

·         Only one objection from the public that referred to competition to private landlords, but that is not a planning consideration.

Prior to members debating the application, the City Development Manager reminded members that they needed to set aside any consideration of Council's ownership of the site, and members should only consider the planning merits of the case.

Members' Questions

Members' raised concerns over the number of cycle spaces the applicant had proposed compared to the number of students living in the halls. Officers advised that for the building to have enough cycle spaces the proposal would have to be significantly altered.  Officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 101.

Construction of dormer windows to north and south roofslopes (re-submission of 14/00462/HOU)

(TAKE IN REPORT BY THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported that since the committee report was published, one further representation had been received. This claims that the main objection to this application amongst a number of residents of Dene Hollow is based on the potential for any future occupiers of this property to have children. This representation argues that this is not a valid planning reason upon which to base an objection.

Members' Questions

In response to a question on why this was a resubmission, officers explained that the previous application had been described incorrectly therefore could not be determined. 

Members' Comments

No comments were raised.

RESOLVED that permission be granted subject to the conditions outlined in the City Development Manager's report.

Construction of additional storey to form 3 flats; external alterations to ground floor to form cycle/refuse stores (re-submission of 13/01460/FUL)

(TAKE IN REPORT FROM THE CITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER)

The City Development Manager reported in the supplementary matters list that as set out in the report the planning agent acting for the applicant has indicated a willingness to make the required contributions to mitigate the significant effect on the Solent Special Protection Areas which would result from the development. However no mechanism for the securing of the mitigation has been suggested or agreed. Accordingly it is considered appropriate that a second recommendation be added to allow the application to be refused in a timely manner if the mitigation is not secured in a reasonable timescale.

Members' Questions

No questions were raised

Members' Comments

No comments were raised.

RESOLVED that:

(1) Delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to grant conditional planning permission subject to securing of an appropriate contribution towards mitigation measures in connection with the Solent Special Protection Areas SPD.

(2) Delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to refuse planning permission if mitigation measures in connection with the Solent Special Protection Areas SPD are not secured within one month of the resolution.