Agenda and draft minutes

Planning Committee - Wednesday, 12th August, 2020 2.00 pm

Venue: Virtual Remote Meeting - Remote. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services  Email: Democratic@portsmouthcc.gov.uk

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

49.

Apologies

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

 

50.

Declaration of Members' Interests

Minutes:

Item 4: 19/00886/FUL 187 Havant Road

Councillor David Fuller declared a personal and prejudicial interest because of his employer's business, another care home on Havant Road.  There could be the appearance of bias if he participates in and votes on this item. He will not participate in or vote on this item and will vacate the chair.

 

Councillor Lynne Stagg declared a personal and prejudicial interest as her daughter works for the Society of St James.  She would leave the meeting for this item.

 

Councillor Terry Norton declared a personal and prejudicial interest because he had carried out some case work relating to this application.  He would make a deputation and then leave and not take part in the debate.

 

Item 8: 20/00322/FUL Portsmouth Football Club, Fratton Park, Frogmore Road.

Councillor Donna Jones declared a pecuniary interest because she is the stadium Director and had been leading this piece of work.  She would leave the meeting for this item.

 

51.

Update on previous applications

 

 

Planning Applications

Minutes:

The Head of Development Management gave the following updates:

 

The Planning Inspector had upheld this planning committee's decisions regarding the appeals for the applications at 7 Beatrice Road and 32 Montgomery Road.

 

52.

187 Havant Road, 19/00886/FUL - Conversion of care home (Class C2) to 13 self-contained units of 'move-on' accommodation (Class C3), with associated bicycle and refuse storage (amended description) (report item 1) pdf icon PDF 581 KB

Minutes:

Councillor David Fuller left the meeting for this item and Councillor Judith Smyth took over as Chair.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report and added that in Supplementary Matters Report that had been circulated to the committee:

 

10 further representations had been received since publication of the report objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

 

a) short notice given to residents to make comments;

b) no facilities in the area to accommodate the needs of the residents;

c) off-licence very close to the site which would not help residents;

d) inappropriate location with many elderly residents and families;

e) increased pressure on local health services;

f) increased parking problems due to lack of visitor parking;

g) concern that some local residents still have not been consulted properly about the proposals; decision seems to be being rushed through;

h) problems in the area have already increased since temporary use of the building;

i) flats do not meet required size standards;

 

One additional representation received in support of the proposal, making the following points:

a) the change of use will not be significant;

b) the use is likely to generate less traffic as the residents are unlikely to own cars;

c) the area has good accessibility to the city centre by public transport and cycling;

d) provision of move-on accommodation for the homeless is essential;

e) Drayton would benefit from a more diverse population.

 

Officers considered that the matters raised in the further representations had been addressed within the committee report. 

 

Further written deputations were read out as part of the officer presentation from:

 

Against

Marcus Kaye with additional comments from his daughter Susannah Williams

Julie Salmond

Darren Brewer

J M Parry

Spencer-Gardner

Dawn Young

 

Supporting.

Applicant

 

Deputations were given by Councillor Steve Wemyss and Councillor Terry Norton.  Both were against the application.

 

Councillor Darren Sanders gave a deputation in support of the application.

 

Deputations are not included in the minutes but can be viewed on the livestream on the following link https://livestream.com/accounts/14063785/planning-12aug2020

 

Members' Questions

In response to questions from members, officers explained that:

·         The planning committee has no control over codes of conduct or eviction policies for occupiers or tenants.

·         This application has been assessed as a specific type of accommodation: move-on.  Planning Officers have used The Homeless Foundation's definition of move-on accommodation as set out in paragraph 5.4 of the report. 

·         The officers' view is that although room sizes are significantly below the nationally set minimum room size standards, this is acceptable in this instance.

·         The application is for self-contained units and therefore fall within Class 3 use category as the property is not for one family nor is it a HMO. 

·         The recommended condition stipulates that tenants' can reside there for a maximum of two years.  This adequately mitigates the use of the land.

·         PCS19 states that all new developments should meet the size standards.

·         There is a need to consider whether the need to house rough sleepers outweighs the need to meet the minimum  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

53.

Land Corner Northern Parade & Doyle Avenue, 20/00357/CS3 - Construction of 16 dwellings, comprising 4no. 3 bedroom townhouses, 3no. 4 bedroom accessible houses and 9no. 2 bedroom flats with associated parking (resubmission of 19/01690/CS3) (report item 2)

Minutes:

Councillor Fuller re-joined the meeting and Chaired the rest of the meeting.

 

The Planning Officer presented the report and drew attention to the Supplementary Matters which reported that:

 

36 further representations have been received since publication of the Officer Report for Committee, objecting to the proposal on the following grounds:

a) Development out of character with other properties in the area;

b) Inadequate parking causing highway /pedestrian safety and air quality concerns; consideration should be given to ways to provide more parking in the local area through changes to highway markings etc;

c) Lack of outside space for residents;

d) Overdevelopment of the site;

e) Increased population will create problems with social distancing on footpaths and roads, increasing health risk;

f) There could be better alternative uses for the site such as a park, community centre or parking provision for the nearby school;

g) The houses and flats are too big for the plot;

h) Internal arrangement of the flats not suitable for families;

i) Increased indiscriminate parking could lead to issues with emergency vehicle access in the area;

j) Particular concerns about increased parking problems in Templeton Close and Conan Road;

k) Feel that the scheme is being 'pushed through' without due regard to residents' concerns;

l) Increased strain on local facilities and services such as healthcare;

m) Negative impact on local house prices;

n) Insufficient bicycle storage;       

o) Limited bus services from Northern Parade;

p) Increased waste and pollution.

A letter had also been received from Penny Mordaunt MP, making the council aware of the concerns raised by residents in relation to parking pressure and safety of road users.  The letter requests that the Planning Department considers the concerns of residents carefully as part of the planning process. 

 

The Planning Officer reported that:

 

Matters relating to design, layout, standard of living accommodation and parking had been addressed within the planning committee report.  The concern regarding impact on house prices is not a material planning consideration. 

 

The applicant confirmed their intention to provide electric vehicle charging points for the three disabled parking spaces in front of the dwellings fronting Conan Road. 

 

An additional plan showing the detailed elevations of the cycle and refuse storage facilities had also been provided.  Conditions 2, 18 and 19 had been updated to reflect the additional plan number.

 

Further written deputations were read out as part of the officer presentation from:

 

Against

Janet Rennell-Smith

Stephen Carter

Mrs N Vaughan

 

Councillor Scott Payter-Harris gave a deputation against the application.

 

Members' Questions

In response to questions from members, officers explained that:

 

The Highways Engineer had clarified his concerns regarding amenities and impact on air quality of people driving around looking for parking spaces.

Solar panels would be installed on the roofs.

 

Seven or eight representations had been received after the report had been published.   Approximately ten more had been received early this week.  None of these had indicated that they wished to make a deputation.

 

Parking in front of the houses on Northern Parade  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.

1-3 Warwick Crescent, 19/01697/FUL - Construction of a 3-storey block of 4no. 5-bedroom and 1no. 6-bedroom student accommodation cluster apartments with associated refuse and cycle stores and amenity space (description amended 28/01/2020 and amended plans) (report item 3)

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report.

 

Further written deputations were read out as part of the officer presentation from:

 

FlorentinaBoorman - against

PDP Architecture LLP, the agent on behalf of the applicant.

 

Members' Questions

In response to questions from members, the Planning Officer explained that:

 

A management plan is being commissioned under section 106 to secure the contributions and the management of student arrivals and departures and will include having a one hour slot in the first weekend or first two weekends of term.

 

The original permission agreed in 2019 was based broadly on the public house that had been there previously.  The current application is not materially larger.

 

This application is for residential student and therefore would not directly address any employment use.  This is an application for a different type of resident for the property that already has planning approval so there is no loss of commercial use.

 

Members' Comments

Members sympathised with the loss of light for the neighbouring property caused by this building but noted that it would be the same size as the pub that had been there originally.

 

RESOLVED

Permission was granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and delegated authority granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth.

 

 

55.

109-113 Sultan Road, 19/00589/FUL - Construction of additional storey and conversion of first floor to provide five self-contained flats; alterations to rear of ground floor to provide access, cycle storage and refuse storage (report item 4)

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report and asked the members to note that the following line in the report should be deleted: Paragraph 5.8: all but one window.

 

A further written deputation was read out as part of the officer presentation from Kim Blake objecting to the application.

 

Members' Questions.

In response to questions from members, the Planning Officer explained that:

 

The parapet would be 2.4m higher than the existing one. The shadow on the neighbouring garden is not considered to be detrimental. 

 

The windows at the back of the building would be obscure glazed.

 

Members' Comments.

Members noted that this would be an overbearing feature for neighbours especially at no. 115. However, there is sufficient street parking.

 

RESOLVED

Permission was granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and delegated authority granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth.

 

56.

Portsmouth Football Club, Fratton Park, Frogmore Road, 20/00322/FUL - Improvements and alterations to the north-east and south-east sections (Milton End) to include construction of turnstiles and entrances (including change of use of part of local residential garden); construction of buildings to provide further facilities including disabled access, toilet blocks and security office; improvements and alterations to concourse areas, stands, seating and facilities; extension of roof; retention of tv screen and replacement of boundary walls (report item 5)

Minutes:

The Planning Officer presented the report and drew attention to the Supplementary Matters which reported that two further representations had been received since publication of the report.

 

One representation raises objection to the proposals on the following grounds:

a) Lack of notification to neighbours about the proposals;

b) Concern about increased numbers of visitors to the stadium and resulting impact on local parking;

c) Concern about residents safety if increased numbers of people entering and leaving the stadium on match days;

d) Noise and disturbance during construction works;

e) Increased parking problems likely to be caused by construction vehicles.

 

It is confirmed that public consultation was carried out in the form of letters to immediate surrounding neighbours and a site notice, as per the details set out in paragraph 4.1 of the committee report.  The proposal would not result in an increase in the overall capacity of the football stadium. Any problems that may arise during construction would be short term and would be addressed through separate environmental legislation. 

 

One representation is from the occupiers of No.42 Carisbrooke Road, raising concerns about the construction of a wall on the south-east side of the site, as follows:

a) Wall being built but permission not yet granted;

b) Only notified late about the intention to start works on the wall;

c) Noise and disturbance;

d) Concern about open access from the new storage area into private garden;

e) Concern about what may be stored in the storage area;

f) Loss of privacy

 

In response to the above representation, the applicant's agent confirmed that work had begun on the construction of a new wall to the rear of No.44 Carisbrooke Road, the timing of which related to part of the purchase agreement of the land.  The applicants had since arranged to meet with the occupants of No.42 Carisbrooke Road to agree a suitable boundary treatment adjacent to their garden. 

 

One representation received in support of the scheme, making the following points:

a) The works would create better segregation of away fans;

b) Would provide proper facilities for disabled fans;

c) Hope that there could be wider upgrading of stadium facilities in the future, subject to improved road/railway infrastructure;

d) The scheme would improve Specks Lane;

e) Improvements to the Football Club could act as a catalyst to rejuvenating the    Fratton and Milton areas of the city.

 

Further consultee comment - Environmental Health:

The Environmental Health Officer has commented that in their view, the provision of the proposed new concourse, which would be closer to the properties in Alverstone Road, would not represent a significant difference in noise environment.  The works would not increase the capacity of the stadium and would be used as a supporters' entry and exit before and after the game similar to the use of the existing walkway.  In addition, the new concourse is likely to disperse fans more quickly and the screening may result in reduced communication between fans on the walkway and those below.  In summary, given the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.