Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ken Ellcome, Scott Harris and Hugh Mason. Councillors Darren Sanders and Robert New were in attendance as standing deputies.

Councillor Aiden Gray declared an interest in application 1 - Myfanwy House, 14-16 Magdala Road, Portsmouth - in that he has been personally working with residents and the 'Friends of Myfanwy House'. He was also appearing as a deputation on the matter.

RECOMMENDED that the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 22 July 2015 are agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 22 July 2015 be approved as a correct record and signed by the chair.

Planning Applications

There were no updates.

Councillor Steve Hastings took the chair for this item following Councillor Gray's earlier declaration of interest.

It was reported in the Assistant Director of Culture and City Developments supplementary matters list that notwithstanding the submission of a report outlining the results of survey work to establish whether the existing building has a roost, or roosts, for bats, in response to a concern from the occupier of the adjoining property a further survey was undertaken and the results were forwarded to the Council's ecologist for assessment. His comments were attached to the supplementary matters list. It is concluded that even if the building did support small numbers of pipistrelle bats, and if the measures set out in the report to address this were to form the basis of an application for a European protected species mitigation licence from Natural England (NE), then it is considered that the development would be likely to be granted a licence, and would appear to be able to be accommodated under the low-impact class licence. It is therefore recommended that the following condition be attached should permission be granted:

Development shall proceed in accordance with the recommendations set out in the Additional Bat Detector Survey Work & Report - Redevelopment of Myfanwy House, 14-16 Magdala Road, Portsmouth, PO6 2QG for the Abbeyfield Solent Society Ltd (FOA Ecology, letter report dated 5^th August 2015) regarding pre-commencement bat survey work and subsequent working methods and integration of new bat roost features.

Reason: To protect biodiversity in accordance with Policy PCS13 of the Portsmouth Plan.

A deputation was heard from Mr Potter, representing himself and the Hunt family of No.18 Magdala Road who included the following points in his representations:

·         The development will result in a compromise in privacy.

·         Proposed building is substantially larger than current one.

·         There are few windows and a fire-escape currently facing No.18.

·         There is a greater mass coming towards No.18.

·         New development will require additional staff.

·         Sewer system won't be able to take any more developments.

·         Much of Cosham's architecture has been vandalised over the last decade.

·         Cosham's heritage is being taken away and has very little Edwardian/Victorian architecture left.

·         The ambience of Cosham will be affected.

·         Strongly object to the findings of the bat survey. Feel it is flawed.

·         I see bats in numbers every night and would invite anyone to view at dusk and dawn to see what I see.

·         It may be seen as impartial but I do not believe it to be.

·         The Planning Committee needs to re-address the bat survey.

·         No.14 was gifted to the Abbeyfield Society. It needs to continue in its current form to provide facilities for elderly persons.

·         Would ask that there is a covenant to restrict the change of use to residential.

Deputations were also heard from Mr Mitchell (the applicant) and Mr Knight (the applicant's agent) who included the following points in their representations:

·         The development will provide supported sheltered housing for 7-11 residents in individual units.

·         This is not a care or nursing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

Councillor Aiden Gray was back in the chair for the remainder of the meeting.

This application had been brought to the committee at the request of ward Councillor Paul Godier.

A deputation was heard from ward Councillor Paul Godier who included the following points in his representations:

·         With 16 units parking will be a problem. Previous use as a pub, people used to walk so parking was never an issue.

·         Could be potentially over 30 car users.

·         Concerned about the tenants who may live there.

·         This is a family area.

·         The area has been beautified with the hub and improvements with the school.

·         Concerned about the potential of social problems. There are elderly, vulnerable residents living in Ladywood House who rarely leave their properties.

·         Policy PSC16 refers to community benefit - do not believe there is any benefit to the community with this development.

Members' questions

Members questioned the number of parking permits allocated to the development, the number of bathrooms per floor and the 'open space' for the occupiers of the development. The development is entitled to two parking permits under the parking scheme. With regards to the number of bathrooms, there are two on the ground floor and one bath and one shower on the second floor. The yard area to the rear of the property is the amenity space for the occupiers.

Members' comments

Members felt that the proposal was an over-development with 16 units, it is inappropriate for the area, particularly with the lack of cooking and bathing facilities it was unlikely to be for student use and the lack of parking provision.

RESOLVED that planning permission be refused for the following reason:

1.  In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed use of the building as extended would amount to an over-intensive development of the site and provide a poor quality of accommodation for future occupiers. The proposal is therefore contrary to the aims and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework and to policy PCS23 of the Portsmouth Plan.

2.  In the absence of a suitable agreement to secure appropriate mitigation measures, the development would be likely to have a significant effect on the Solent Protection Areas and so is contrary to Policy PCS13 of the Portsmouth Plan and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (as amended).

The Assistant Director of Culture and City Development reported in the supplementary matters list that the following comments had been received from the Highway Engineer:

Whilst on-street parking in the vicinity is unrestricted, it is severely congested due to the predominantly terraced housing without off-road parking facilities. A proposed parking scheme was rejected by residents within 3 years ago as the majority of vehicles are associated with residents but the width of the housing frontages allows for 1 space per household. Vehicles associated with vehicle repair/MOT garages can cause frustration for local residents, with vehicles left in the residential roads on a regular basis, reducing parking availability. However, considering the unrestricted parking in the vicinity of the site an objection on highway grounds cannot be sustained and therefore no objection is raised.

A further objection had been received on the grounds that the applicants existing garage in Wadham Road causes parking problems and is noisy.

Deputations were heard from Mr Farah, Mr Hoard and Mr Knight, all objecting to the proposal, who included the following points in their representations:

·         This is the third time the applicant has sought to change the use of the building. The first was withdrawn and the second was refused.

·         This proposal has produced 32 objections from residents.

·         A repair centre will impact on local residents.

·         The noise will have an impact. This proposal brings an additional 60 hours of noise.

·         The proposal will generate additional traffic.

·         There is an issue of personal safety to pedestrians on the thoroughfare.

·         Nearest home is 12 inches away.

·         There is a major risk of fire and explosion from this use.

·         There is no talk of improvement for local residents from what is there already.

·         Residents' objections have not been addressed.

·         The proposal does not offer economic or social benefit to residents.

·         The corrugated roof and plastic curtain will not delight or enhance the area.

·         The proposal is on a 2-way road with vehicles crossing.

·         I live next door to the site and have done for 30 years.

·         It has always been used as a store. Vehicles would arrive to drop off/pick up items from the store maybe twice a day. Sometimes noise could be heard from items being thrown into the van or into the store.

·         The noise associated with a repair garage and MOT testing station is going to be far greater.

A deputation was also heard from the applicants' agent, Mr Tutton who included the following points in his representations:

·         The building stands back 2m from the footpath.

·         There are obscure glazed windows on the east elevation which are mainly broken.

·         The previous application for the change of use was refused for one reason. Rather than appeal the decision the applicant decided to address the reason for refusal.

·         The asbestos roof will be replaced.

·         There will be plastic cladding on the front and plastic windows to replace the broken ones.

·         A heavy plastic curtain will be fixed across the entrance to curtail noise.

·         Highly unlikely that these  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.