Public Document Pack
Planning and Rights of Way Panel
Tuesday, 26 th October 2010 at 9.30 am PLEASE NOTE TIME OF MEETING Committee Rooms 1 and 2 Civic Centre
This meeting is open to the public
Members Councillor Fitzhenry (Chair) Councillor Jones (Vice-Chair) Councillor Letts Councillor Mead Councillor Osmond Councillor Slade Councillor Thomas
Contacts Democratic Support Officer Sue Lawrence Tel: 023 8083 3569 Email: susan.lawrence@southampton.gov.uk
Head of Planning and Sustainability Paul Nichols Tel: 023 8083 2553 Email: [email protected]
PUBLIC INFORMATION
Terms of Reference
The Panel deals with various planning Smoking policy – The Council operates a no- and rights of way functions. It smoking policy in all civic buildings determines planning applications and is consulted on proposals for the draft development plan. Mobile Telephones – Please turn off your mobile telephone whilst in the meeting. Public Representations
At the discretion of the Chair, members Fire Procedure – In the event of a fire or other of the public may address the meeting emergency a continuous alarm will sound and about any report on the agenda for the you will be advised by Council officers what meeting in which they have a relevant action to take. interest.
Members of the public in attendance at Access – Access is available for disabled the meeting are advised of the process people. Please contact the Democratic to be followed. Support Officer who will help to make any necessary arrangements.
Southampton City Council’s Six Dates of Meetings: Municipal Year 20 10 /1 1 Priorities
• Providing good value, high quality 20 10 201 1 services 25 May 2010 18 January 2011 • Getting the City working 22 June 15 February • Investing in education and training 20 July 15 March • Keeping people safe 17 August 12 April • Keeping the City clean and green 31 August • Looking after people 28 September
26 October 23 November 21 December
CONDUCT OF MEETING
Terms of Reference Business to be discussed
The terms of reference of the Planning Only those items listed on the attached and Rights of Way Panel are contained in agenda may be considered at this meeting. Part 3 (Schedule 2) of the Council’s Constitution
Rules of Procedure Quorum
The meeting is governed by the Council The minimum number of appointed Members Procedure Rules as set out in Part 4 of required to be in attendance to hold the the Constitution. meeting is three.
Disclosure of Interests
Members are required to disclose, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct, both the existence and nature of any “personal” or “prejudicial” interests they may have in relation to matters for consideration on this Agenda.
Personal Interests
A Member must regard himself or herself as having a personal interest in any matter:
(i) if the matter relates to an interest in the Member’s register of interests; or (ii) if a decision upon a matter might reasonably be regarded as affecting to a greater extent than other Council Tax payers, ratepayers and inhabitants of the District, the wellbeing or financial position of himself or herself, a relative or a friend or:- any employment or business carried on by such person;
any person who employs or has appointed such a person, any firm in which such a person is a partner, or any company of which such a person is a director;
any corporate body in which such a person has a beneficial interest in a class of securities exceeding the nominal value of £5,000; or
any body listed in Article 14(a) to (e) in which such a person holds a position of general control or management.
A Member must disclose a personal interest. /Continued…
Prejudicial Interests Having identified a personal interest, a Member must consider whether a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably think that the interest was so significant and particular that it could prejudice that Member’s judgement of the public interest. If that is the case, the interest must be regarded as “prejudicial” and the Member must disclose the interest and withdraw from the meeting room during discussion on the item.
It should be noted that a prejudicial interest may apply to part or the whole of an item.
Where there are a series of inter-related financial or resource matters, with a limited resource available, under consideration a prejudicial interest in one matter relating to that resource may lead to a member being excluded from considering the other matters relating to that same limited resource.
There are some limited exceptions.
Note: Members are encouraged to seek advice from the Monitoring Officer or his staff in Democratic Services if they have any problems or concerns in relation to the above.
Principles of Decision Making All decisions of the Council will be made in accordance with the following principles:-
• proportionality (i.e. the action must be proportionate to the desired outcome); • due consultation and the taking of professional advice from officers; • respect for human rights; • a presumption in favour of openness, accountability and transparency; • setting out what options have been considered; • setting out reasons for the decision; and • clarity of aims and desired outcomes.
In exercising discretion, the decision maker must:
• understand the law that regulates the decision making power and gives effect to it. The decision-maker must direct itself properly in law; • take into account all relevant matters (those matters which the law requires the authority as a matter of legal obligation to take into account); • leave out of account irrelevant considerations; • act for a proper purpose, exercising its powers for the public good; • not reach a decision which no authority acting reasonably could reach, (also known as the “rationality” or “taking leave of your senses” principle); • comply with the rule that local government finance is to be conducted on an annual basis. Save to the extent authorised by Parliament, ‘live now, pay later’ and forward funding are unlawful; and • act with procedural propriety in accordance with the rules of fairness.
AGENDA Agendas and papers are available via the Council’s Website
1 APOLOGIES AND CHANGES IN PANEL MEMBERSHIP (IF ANY)
To note any changes in membership of the Panel made in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4.3.
2 DISCLOSURE OF PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS
In accordance with the Local Government Act 2000, and the Council's Code of Conduct adopted on 16th May 2007, Members to disclose any personal or prejudicial interests in any matter included on the agenda for this meeting.
NOTE: Members are reminded that, where applicable, they must complete the appropriate form recording details of any such interests and hand it to the Panel Administrator prior to the commencement of this meeting.
3 STATEMENT FROM THE C HAIR
4 MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (INCLUDING MATTERS ARISING)
To approve and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings held on 31 st August 2010 and 21 st September 2010 and to deal with any matters arising, attached.
CONSIDERATION OF PL ANNING APPLICATIONS
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 9:30 AM TO 10: 15 AM
5 LAND AT SOUTHERN CORNER OF ST JAMES ROAD AND SALEM STREET - 10/00879/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending approval be refused in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 10:15 AM TO 10 :45 AM
6 258 BROADLANDS ROAD 10/00409/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending conditional approval be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 10:45 AM TO 11 :00 AM
7 SHIRLEY AVENUE, SO15 5NG 10/00889/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending approval be refused in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 11:00 AM TO 11 :15 AM
8 REAR OF 336-340 PORTSMOUTH ROAD 10/01093/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending conditional approval be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 11:15 AM TO 12:15 PM
9 THORNERS HOMES REGENTS PARK ROAD SO15 8NW 10/01090/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 12:15 PM TO 12 :45 PM
10 CANUTE ROAD / ALBERT ROAD SOUTH 09/0966/OUT
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 13:45 PM TO 14 :15 PM
11 69-72 ST MARY'S STREET 10/00006/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 14:15 PM TO 14 :45 PM
12 12-NEWLANDS PRIMARY SCHOOL, ULLSWATER ROAD 10/00933/R3CFL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 14:45 PM AND 1 5:15 PM
13 COLLEGE STREET AND RICHMOND STREET 10/00521/MMA
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
ITEMS TO BE HEARD BE TWEEN 15:15 PM AND 1 5:30 PM
14 UPPER DEACON ROAD 10/01094/FUL
Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending conditional approval be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.
MAIN AGENDA ITEMS
15 OBJECTION TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER
Report of the Director of Neighbourhoods regarding an objection to the implementation of a Tree Preservation Order (659 Portswood Road), attached.
16 STREET NAMING -VOSPER
Report of the Head of Planning and Sustainability detailing the proposed street names for the new housing development at the site of the former Vosper Thornycroft shipyard, attached.
17 STREET NAMING - MALVERN ROAD
Report of the Head of Planning and Sustainability detailing the proposed street name for the new housing development on the site of 14 – 16 Malvern Road, attached.
Monday, 18 October 2010 SOLICITOR TO THE COUNCIL
Agenda Item 4
To approve and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings held on 31 st August 2010 and 21 st September 2010 and to deal with any matters arising, attached.
This page is intentionally left blank
Appendix 1 PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 31 August 2010
Present: Fitzhenry (Chair), Jones (Vice-Chair), Letts, Osmond, Samuels, Slade (except Minute Item 35) and Thomas
Apologies: Councillor Raymond Mead
29. APOLOGIES AND CHANGES IN PANEL MEMBERSHIP (IF ANY) The Panel noted that Councillor Samuels was in attendance as a nominated substitute for Councillor Mead in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4.3.
30. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (INCLUDING MATTERS ARISING) RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 th July 2010 be approved and signed as a correct record.
CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS Copy of all reports circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes.
31. PART OF FORMER CALOR GAS AND DIMPLEX SITE FIRST AVENUE - 10/00385/R3CFL Proposed development at part of the former Calor Gas and Dimplex Site, First Avenue.
Mrs Bradley (Objector) and Mr Cooper (Applicant) were present and with the consent of the Chair addressed the Panel.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS TO RECOMMENDATIONS:
RESOLVED that authority be delegated to the Planning and Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the receipt of a written undertaking from the Director for Environment to secure:-
(i) Provision of site specific highway improvements in the vicinity of the site with such works to be fully operational prior to the site being brought into use in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended) to include:-
- 44 -
(a) Making of Traffic Regulation Orders to restrict parking on Third Avenue and First Avenue and lane marking on First Avenue; (b) A financial contribution towards the provision of a cycle route on the opposite side of Millbrook Road to provide cyclists with an alternative route; (c) To include improvements to Manor House Avenue/Third Avenue junction for improved HGV turning; (d) To provide directional signage for access to and egress from the site; (e) Changes to traffic light control for traffic using the new spur link from Third Avenue onto the Millbrook roundabout; (f) Arrangements for supervision fees relating to the necessary highways works.
(ii) Submission and implementation of a Travel Plan;
(iii) Submission and implementation of a Training and Employment Management Plan;
(iv) Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer; and
(v) All the above site specific highway improvements to be in place prior to the use commencing.
Amended Conditions :
06 - Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site that will achieve a reduction in CO2 emissions of at least 12.5% for the workshop building and at least 15% for the office building must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO2 emissions of the development by at least 12.5% for the workshop building and at least 15% for the office building must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the development hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. REASON To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
15 - Sustainability statement implementation Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent, the approved sustainability measures shall be implemented unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
- 45 -
REASON: To ensure the development minimises overall demand for resources and is compliant with the City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006) policies SDP13 and SDP6.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The proposed development would provide a depot facility which is a similar employment use to those safeguarded under Policy REI 10 of the Local Plan. The proposed use would not be harmful to existing industrial or warehousing uses on adjoining sites. The impact on traffic levels in the surrounding area and particularly the impact on the Port of Southampton and its national economic importance have been carefully considered and the impact is considered to be acceptable. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted. “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP13, SDP15, SDP16, and TI2 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) Policies CS6, CS9, CS13, CS18, CS19, CS20 and CS25 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth 2009), PPG13 (Transport) and PPG24 (Planning & Noise) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
32. STONEHAM CEMETERY ROAD - 10/00728/FUL Redevelopment of the site by the erection of 11 two-storey houses (5x two-bedroom and 6 x three bedroom) with associated parking and other facilities including allotment gardens and alterations to the road to provide a new footway.
Ms O’Rourke (Applicant), Mr Knight (Agent), Ms Mason (local resident) and Mr Board (Swaythling Housing Association) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE AMENDED OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED (i) that authority be delegated to the Planning and Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a Section106 Legal Agreement to secure:-
(a) Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended);
- 46 -
(b) A financial contribution towards strategic transport projects for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG/D; (c) Financial contribution towards highway works at Stoneham Cemetery Road, including supervision fees and in agreement with SCC Bereavement Services. (d) Financial contributions towards the relevant elements of public open space required by the development in line with polices CLT5, CLT6 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policy CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended); (e) Amenity Open Space (“open space”) (f) Playing Field (g) Play space; (h) Affordable housing provision in accordance with appropriate SPG (i) A refuse management plan to outline the methods of storage and waste collection of refuse from the land in accordance with policy SDP1 of the development plan and appropriate SPG. (j) Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer. (k) Financial contribution towards the long term monitoring and management of hibernacula and the grassland habitat within the receptor area as shown on plan 2 to ensure that they remain in a suitable condition to support reptiles.
(ii) In the event that the legal agreement is not completed by 13 th September 2010 the Head of Planning and Sustainability be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.
Amended Conditions:
06 – Ecological Mitigation Statement Development shall be implemented in accordance with the biodiversity mitigation measures set out in the Reptile Mitigation Strategy Rev 1 and the Ecology Assessment November 2008 Rev 1 June 2010, which, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority shall be implemented in accordance with the programme before any demolition work or site clearance takes place. REASON To safeguard protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in the interest of preserving and enhancing biodiversity.
14 - Glazing - soundproofing from external traffic noise Works pursuant to this permission shall not be commenced until a scheme for protecting the proposed houses from traffic noise has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, that scheme shall specify either:-
Outer pane of glass - 10mm Air gap between panes - 12mm
- 47 -
Inner pane of glass - 6 mm or, with secondary glazing with a - Outer pane of glass - 6mm Air gap between panes - 100mm Inner pane of glass - 6.4 mm
There must be no trickle vents installed in any case. For ventilation purposes in all cases, provision of acoustically treated 'BBA' approved mechanically powered ventilation should be the preferred option. However, provision of acoustic trickle vents will be acceptable. Once approved, that glazing shall be installed before any of the flats are first occupied and thereafter retained at all times. REASON: In order to protect occupiers of the flats from traffic noise.
16 - Code for Sustainable Homes Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve the measures set out in the sustainability and energy statement dated May 2010 and submitted on 14 th June 2010, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority, shall be submitted to the local planning authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of development hereby granted. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certification as issued by a qualified Code for Sustainable Homes certification body. REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
Additional Conditions:
30 - Footpath Construction The private footpath as shown on drawing 941-PD-101 rev F to be constructed to the east of the housing development hereby approved shall be available for use prior to the first occupation of the development and shall be retained and maintained at all times by the developer or their successors in title. REASON To ensure appropriate pedestrian access is provided and retained in the interests of highway safety.
31 – Acoustic fencing - [Pre-Commencement Condition] Works pursuant to this permission shall not be commenced until a scheme for the installation of a noise barrier to protect the houses located on plots 10 and 11 from noise associated with the neighbouring commercial site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The agreed scheme shall be implemented prior to the occupation of the dwellings and thereafter retained at all times. REASON In order to protect occupiers from noise associated with commercial activity.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The development maximises the use of this
- 48 -
previously developed land with attractively designed energy efficient dwellings by meeting level 6 of the Code for Sustainable Homes. The loss of a community facility and an area of open space (allotments) has been justified and is accepted by the local planning authority. The provision of residential accommodation on this currently derelict piece of land will make a positive contribution to the city’s level of affordable family housing. Sufficient measures have been put in place to mitigate against the impact of the development on the site’s ecology and appropriate measures have been taken to improve access into the site. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted. “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP6, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP14, SDP16, NE4, CLT3, CLT5, CLT6, H1, H2, H3 and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS3, CS4, CS5, CS13, CS15, CS16, CS19, CS20, CS21, CS22 and CS25 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010), PPG13 (Transport) and PPG24 (Planning & Noise) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
33. 210 BASSETT GREEN ROAD - 10/00811/FUL Redevelopment of the site by the erection of 3 x 6 bed detached dwellings with integral garage, car parking and amenity space.
Mrs Ward (Architect), Mr Thakrar and Mr Strother (Local Residents) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED
RECORDED VOTE FOR: Councillors Fitzhenry, Jones, Letts, Osmond, Slade and Thomas AGAINST: Councillor Samuels
RESOLVED that planning approval be granted subject to the conditions in the report and the amended conditions set out below.
4 – Parking and Access Prior to the occupation of each dwelling hereby approved both the access to the site and the garaged parking spaces serving that dwelling shall be provided in accordance with the plans hereby approved. The garaged parking shall be retained for that purpose and/or ancillary uses and not used for any commercial activity. REASON: To ensure a satisfactory form of development with an appropriate level of on-site parking.
16 - Code for Sustainable Homes Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development
- 49 -
hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code for Sustainable Homes certification body. REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
28 – Plot 3 Fenestration The first floor side window serving Plot 3 bedroom 2 (on elevation plan ref: P25A) shall be omitted from the scheme. REASON: As this window is shown in elevation terms but not on the approved floorplan, and for the avoidance of any doubt so as to avoid any potential overlooking issue.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Following the proposed amendments, and the removal of 2 dwellings from the scheme, the application is considered to be acceptable. Whilst the development includes existing residential garden, and the priority for new development should be on previously developed land, the proposal is considered to respect the established pattern of development and provides additional family housing meeting a specific housing need. The retention of the mature landscape setting and the position of the dwellings within the plot will result in no visual impacts to the existing streetscene or the wider context. Other planning concerns and the views of local residents have been considered, as detailed in the report to the Planning and Rights of Way Panel on 31 st August 2010 but these other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted. “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP15, SDP16, H1, H2 and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS16, CS18, CS19 and CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance, including the “Residential Design Guide”. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010) and PPG13 (Transport) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
34. 36 DELL ROAD - 10/00454/OUT Erection of a 3-storey building comprising of 1 x 3 bed and 4 x 1 bed flats with associated parking and cycle/refuse storage. Outline application seeking consideration of access, appearance, layout and scale (details of landscaping to be reserved).
Mr Warwick (Agent), Mr Sumra (Applicant), Mrs Clegg (Objector), Councillors White, Baillie and P Williams (Ward Councillors) were present and with the consent of the Chair addressed the meeting.
NOTE: Councillor Slade withdrew from the meeting for this item.
- 50 -
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED
RECORDED VOTE: FOR: Councillors Jones, Osmond and Thomas AGAINST: Councillors Fitzhenry, Letts and Samuels
NOTE: Chair used his casting vote.
RESOLVED that conditional planning permission be refused for the reasons set out in the report as amended below.
REASONS FOR REFUSAL
01 – Over-development of the site The proposed introduction of 5 flats would result in the overdevelopment of the site by reason of poor access to natural daylight experienced by the ground floor flat and by failing to provide adequate useable amenity space for the proposed number of units due to the steep gradient of the amenity space. This is having regard to the 9 th June 2010 update to PPS3: Housing, which by removing minimum density requirements has created a shift in considerations which enables greater emphasis to be placed on retaining the spacious and suburban character of the area. The development would thereby prove contrary to the provisions of policies CS5 and CS13 (10 and 11) of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document, SDP1 (i), SDP7 (iv) and H7 (ix) of the Local Plan Review (Adopted Version March 2006) and as supported by the Residential Design Guide SPD 2006 (with particular reference to paragraphs 2.2.1, 2.3.14 and 4.4).
02 - Direct impacts not mitigated by planning agreement In the absence of a completed S.106 Legal Agreement or Unilateral Undertaking the proposal fails to mitigate against its direct impacts and does not, therefore, satisfy the provisions of Policy CS25 (The Delivery of Infrastructure) of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010) as supported by the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance on Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended) in the following ways:-
(a) Measures to satisfy the public open space requirements of the development have not been secured. As such the development is also contrary to the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) Policy CLT5 as supported by Policy CS21 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010);
(b) The development triggers the need for an affordable housing contribution and without such a commitment, or an open-book viability appraisal that can be independently verified, the scheme fails to assist the City with its current housing needs issues and, as such, is contrary to Policy CS15 of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010);
(c) Measures to support sustainable modes of transport, the strategic highway network, and site specific highway requirements (such as necessary improvements to public transport facilities and pavements in the vicinity of
- 51 -
the site) have not been secured contrary to the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006 Policy SDP1 as supported by policies CS18 and CS25 of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010);
(d) In the absence of a commitment to undertaking an off-site highway condition survey the development fails to explain how its impacts will be managed both during and after the construction phase.
35. LAND REAR OF 3-6 SEYMOUR ROAD - 10/00277/FUL Erection of an additional 2 x 2-storey, 4-bed detached houses with associated detached double garage and cycle/refuse storage and replacement house type to house on Plot 1, previously approved under ref. 99/01407/FUL.
RESOLVED that consideration of the application be deferred to a future meeting to allow all interested parties to attend.
36. 9 THE TRIANGLE, COBDEN AVENUE, 10/00606/FUL Change of use from A1 (Shops) to mixed use A3 (Sandwich/Coffee Bar) and use of forecourt as external dining area
RESOLVED that consideration of the application be deferred to a future meeting to allow all interested parties to attend.
37. REAR OF 273 WIMPSON LANE - 10/00523/FUL Erection of a detached 4-bed house with associated parking and storage facilities
Mr Oldfield (Architect) and Councillor Holmes (Ward Councillor) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED that planning approval be granted subject to the conditions in the report and the amended conditions set out below.
Amended Conditions
14 - Code for Sustainable Homes Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code for Sustainable Homes certification body. REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
- 52 -
15 - Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site, that will achieve a reduction in CO 2 emissions [of at least 20%] must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO 2 emissions of the development [by at least 20%] must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development (excluding the demolition phase) hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. REASON: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan and other guidance as set on the attached sheet. Other material considerations such as those listed in the report to the Planning and Rights of Way Panel on the 31.08.10 do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. The proposed dwellings would be in keeping with the surrounding area and would not have a harmful impact on residential amenity or highway safety. Where appropriate planning conditions have been imposed to mitigate any harm identified. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning Permission should therefore be granted having account of the following planning policies: “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, H1, H2, and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS19, and CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010) and PPG13 (Transport) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
38. 34 NORTHCOTE ROAD - 10/00743/FUL 34 Northcote Road, Southampton. Change of use from a 3-bed house (Class C3) to a 4-bed house in multiple occupation, HMO (Class C4)
RESOLVED that consideration of the application be deferred to a future meeting owing to a number of interested parties not receiving sufficient notice to enable them to attend.
39. REAR OF 13-19 FIRGROVE ROAD - 10/00490/OUT Erection of 4 x 3-storey 4-bed houses with associated parking and cycle/refuse storage, outline application seeking consideration of access, appearance, layout and scale (details of landscaping to be reserved).
- 53 -
The Panel noted the withdrawal by Highways Development Control of that part of the report stating that there were no highway objections to the above scheme and recommended that reasons for refusal 3 and 4 as set out in the report be combined.
Mr Wiles (Applicant) and Ms McGuiness (Resident) were present and with the consent of the Chair addressed the Panel.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED that conditional planning permission be refused for the reasons set out in the report as amended below.
Reasons For Refusal
1 - Harm to the character of the area The proposed development involves building on garden land which forms an important amenity space for the existing dwelling houses, is not previously developed land and makes a positive contribution to the spatial character of Firgrove Road which predominantly comprises dwellings situated within long elongated plots with a road frontage. The proposals are considered to represent harm to the character of the area and would prove contrary to the following Development Plan policies and supplementary planning guidance for Southampton:- City of Southampton Local Plan Review ‘saved’ policies (March 2006):- SDP1 (i), SDP4, SDP7 (iv), SDP9 (i) and (v). City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010):- CS4, CS5 and CS13. Sections 2.3.14, 3.1, 3.7, 3.9 and 4.4 of the Residential Design Guide SPD (September 2006).
2 - Harm to the amenities of occupiers of adjoining land The proposal represents an un-neighbourly and overbearing form of development by reason of its' design and height and proximity to the retained rear gardens of 15 and 19 Firgrove Road leading to a sense of enclosure. As such the development would be out of keeping with the established layout of buildings and gardens within the area and would be harmful to the residential amenities of the occupiers of 15 and 19 Firgrove Road, contrary to City of Southampton Local Plan Review ‘saved’ policies (March 2006):- SDP1 (i), SDP7 (iv), SDP9 (i) and (v). City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010):- CS5 and CS13. Sections 2.2.18, 2.2.19, 3.1, 3.7 and 3.9 of the Residential Design Guide SPD (September 2006).
3 – Inadequate/unsafe access The proposal would result in the intensified use of an existing access which does not have sufficient width to allow 2 cars to pass at the entrance and therefore increasing the likelihood of vehicles waiting on the public highway to turn into the site and obstructing the free flow of traffic within Richmond Road / Park Road. In addition, the development proposal fails to provide a safe and convenient access arrangement, because vehicle access taken through the existing garage blocks would be obstructed when the adjacent garage doors are open. As such the development would prejudice
- 54 -
highway safety and would be contrary to policies SDP1 (i) and SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), policy CS13 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010) and section 5 of the Residential Design Guide SPD (September 2006).
40. REAR OF 50 - 53 ROSELANDS GARDENS - 10/00608/FUL Erection of 2 x 3-bed houses with detached shared garage and storage facilities, with existing access to the site widened.
Mr Duggan (Agent), Mrs Williams (Local Property Owner), (Mr Baker and Mr Close (Local Residents) and Councillor Vinson (WardCouncillor) were present and with consent of the Chair addressed the Panel.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED
RECORDED VOTE: FOR: Councillors Fitzhenry, Letts, Jones, Osmond, Samuels and Samuels. AGAINST: Councillor Slade
RESOLVED that conditional planning approval be granted, subject to the conditions in the report and the additional and amended conditions as set out below.
Amended Conditions
03 - Landscaping detailed plan Before the commencement of any site works a detailed landscaping scheme and implementation timetable, which clearly indicates the numbers, planting densities, types, planting size and species of trees and shrubs to be planted, means of enclosure and treatment of hard surfaced areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority the access and parking areas shall be finished in a permeable block paved surface. In particular, a hedge of native species shall be re-instated along the site access on the common boundary with 48 Roselands Gardens, where this is being removed to facilitate construction of the development. The hedge shall be maintained to a height of 1.8 metres high above ground level once established and also maintained in terms of its width to ensure that a minimum access width of 3.1m indicated on drawing SJD/166/568/01 Rev A – except where this widens by Roselands Gardens to facilitate vehicle passing, refuse storage and sight lines to the highway - is maintained at all times thereafter.
The landscaping scheme shall specify all trees to be retained and to be lost and shall provide an accurate tree survey with full justification for the retention of trees or their loss. Any trees to be lost shall be replaced on a favourable basis (a two-for one basis unless circumstances dictate otherwise) to ensure a suitable environment is provided on the site.
- 55 -
Any trees, shrubs, seeded or turfed areas which die, fail to establish, are removed or become damaged or diseased, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting shall be replaced by the Developer in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. The Developer shall be responsible for any replacements for a period of 5 years from the date of planting.
The approved scheme shall be carried out prior to occupation of the building or during the first planting season following the full completion of building works, whichever is sooner. The approved scheme implemented shall be maintained for a minimum period of 5 years following its complete provision. REASON: To improve the appearance of the site and enhance the character of the development in the interests of visual amenity, to ensure that the development makes a positive contribution to the local environment and, in accordance with the duty required of the Local Planning Authority by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
09 - Code for Sustainable Homes Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code for Sustainable Homes certification body. REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
10 – Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site, that will achieve a reduction in CO 2 emissions [of at least 20%] must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO 2 emissions of the development [by at least 20%] must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development (excluding the demolition phase) hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. REASON: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
14 - Ecological Mitigation Statement Prior to development commencing, including site clearance, the developer shall submit a programme of habitat and species mitigation and enhancement measures, [as set out in the submitted Ecological Survey March 2010] which unless otherwise agreed in
- 56 -
writing by the Local Planning Authority shall be implemented in accordance with the programme before any demolition work or site clearance takes place. The triangular area of land at the north-eastern end of the site shall at no time be incorporated into any private garden and shall otherwise be left as a natural area. REASON: To safeguard protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in the interests of preserving and enhancing biodiversity and to control the use of the triangular piece of land in the interests of nature conservation.
Additional Conditions
21 – Drainage Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved details of the proposed means of surface water disposal shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing, which shall take account of the permeable block paving requirement listed in condition 03 above. The development shall proceed in accordance with the agreed details and maintained at all times thereafter. REASON: To ensure the proposal does not increase the likelihood of flooding in the vicinity of the site, particularly cascading down the gradient of the site access towards the new dwellings.
22 – Lighting Scheme Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved a detailed lighting scheme shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. This shall include details of the lighting at the end of the access into the site, of the entrances to the building, cycle and refuse store. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details prior to the development first coming into occupation and maintained in good working order at all times thereafter. REASON: To secure a safe and attractive environment for users of the site.
REASON FOR DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan and other guidance as set on the attached sheet. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. The proposed dwellings would be in keeping with the surrounding area and would not have a harmful impact on residential amenity for the reasons given in the report to the Planning and Rights of Way Panel on the 31.08.10. Where appropriate planning conditions have been imposed to mitigate any harm identified. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning Permission should therefore be granted having account of the following planning policies: “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, H1, H2, and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS19, and CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010) and PPG13 (Transport) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
- 57 -
41. SOUTHAMPTON GENERAL HOSPITAL TREMONA ROAD - 10/00881/FUL Construction of a Helicopter Landing Pad on the upper deck of the multi-storey car park and reconfiguration of car parking spaces.
Dr Eynon (Consultant – Major Trauma – Southampton General Hospital), (Mr Rover (Expert Witness) and Mr Hole (Local Resident) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDICTIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED that planning approval be granted subject to the conditions in the report and the additional condition set out below.
Additional Condition
5 - Warning Signage Signage providing warning of the imminent landing and/or aircraft take-off shall be installed prior to first use of the heli-pad facility and thereafter maintained and operated in accordance with details to be first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of public safety.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development was acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The provision of a facility for the air ambulance and other similar airborne emergency vehicles within the allocated campus of Southampton General and Princess Anne Hospitals is fully in accordance with Policy CS10 of the Core Strategy and Policy HC1 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review which promotes and safeguards the Hospital site for the development of Healthcare and support facilities. Other material considerations such as noise disturbance, air quality and impact on ecology did not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. Issues of public safety with regard to aircraft flights were a matter of regulatory control outside the planning system. The net loss of 8 parking spaces from the car-park is compensated for by other planned development on the site. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission was granted. “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP12, SDP15, SDP16 and HC1 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS10, CS13 and CS22, and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPG13 (Transport) and PPG24 (Planning & Noise) were also relevant to the determination of the application.
- 58 -
42. REAR OF 58 PARK ROAD - 10/00598/FUL Erection of a 2-storey, 2-bed house with associated bin/cycle storage and pedestrian access from Mansion Road
Mr Wiles (Applicant) was in attendance and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED UNAIMOUSLY
RESOLVED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions in the report and the amended condition set out below.
Amended (Reason for) Condition
5 – Code for Sustainable Homes Delete all reference to the South East Plan in the reason given for imposing Condition No 5.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. In visual terms the proposals will bring improvements to the street scene, and the additional residential accommodation will contribute to the mix of housing available within this location and provide an appropriate residential environment for future occupants of the site. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted. “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP5, SDP7, and SDP9 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS16, CS19, CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) and PPS3 (Housing 2010) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
43. REAR OF 88-90 HIGH ROAD - 10/00653/OUT Erection of a 2 storey building to create 4 x 1 bed flats with associated cycle/refuse stores (outline application seeking approval for access, appearance, layout and scale)
Mr Wiles (Architect) was in attendance and with the consent of the Chair addressed the Panel.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED that conditional planning permission be refused for the amended reasons set out below.
- 59 -
Reasons for Refusal
1 - Impact on character of the area It appears to the Council that the proposed development would involve the development of a private residential garden contrary to the guidance contained within Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing - published June 2010) which requires priority to be given to developments on previously developed land. Notwithstanding that issue, the development of the site in isolation is also considered to be out of character with the surrounding context defined by the wider spatial character and appearance of the local area, which mainly consists of garden land with typically ancillary small scale buildings. The proposal would therefore prove contrary to Policies CS4, CS5 and CS13 of the adopted Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010) and the saved policies SDP7 (iii)/(v) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) as supported by the relevant sections of part 3 of the approved Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (September 2006).
2 – Risk of crime The main access route to the proposed residential units formed by the layout of the proposed boundary treatment to the garden of the existing property at 88 High Road is not designed to minimise the opportunity for crime as there is a lack of natural surveillance to the detriment of quality of the residential environment for future occupiers. Furthermore, the proposed post and rail fencing is considered to be a wholly inappropriate form of boundary treatment as an effective security measure adjoining the existing car park area to the north.
The proposal would therefore be contrary to saved policy SDP1 of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) as supported by the relevant sections of part 4 of the approved Residential Design Guide (September 2006).
3 – Tackling climate change The application fails to demonstrate that the proposed development would contribute towards the council’s objective of adaptation to and mitigation of climate change, by committing to an improvement of energy and water efficiency; furthermore measures proposed to reduce surface water run off have not been detailed.
Accordingly the scheme fails to comply with policy CS20 of the Core Strategy Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010).
NOTE : Panel noted that paragraph 5.7 of the report did not apply to the above application .
44. CIVIC CENTRE, CIVIC CENTRE ROAD - 10/00020/R3CFL Former Magistrates Courts, Civic Centre, Bargate, Southampton. Change of use of the courts and police block of the Civic Centre into a Sea City Museum with associated alterations and extensions at roof level and to the north side of the building.
RESOLVED that consideration of the application be deferred at the request of the applicant pending further discussions with the Highway Authority.
- 60 -
45. 173 - 175 UPPER DEACON ROAD - 10/00793/FUL Erection of 2 x 3 bed semi-detached houses with accommodation in the roof space and formation of raised deck car parking area and bin and cycle storage underneath (Re- submission 10/00247/FUL)
Mr Ray (Agent) was present and with the consent of the Chair addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED that planning approval be granted subject to the conditions in the report and the amended and additional conditions set out below.
Amended Conditions
3 - Refuse and Recycling Bin Storage The bin storage areas shown on the approved drawings shall be laid out with a level approach prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved in accordance with the approved plans. The facilities shall include accommodation for the separation of waste to enable recycling. The approved refuse and recycling storage shall be retained whilst the development is used for residential purposes. REASON: A bin enclosure to each dwelling is considered necessary in the interests of the visual appearance of the building and the area in general.
9 - Car Parking The car parking areas shown on the approved drawings shall be laid out and surfaced before the use hereby permitted commences and shall thereafter be kept clear and maintained at all times for that purpose. REASON: To prevent obstruction to traffic in neighbouring roads.
13 - Land Contamination - deleted.
Additional Condition
18 - Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site that will achieve a reduction in CO2 emissions of at least 20% must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO2 emissions of the development by at least 20% must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter.
- 61 -
REASON: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development was acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Overall the scheme was acceptable and the level of development proposed will not result in an adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by surrounding occupiers or to the character and appearance of the area. A suitable balance has been achieved between securing additional housing, parking, on-site amenity space and landscaping, whilst ensuring that existing residential amenity is protected. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted. Policies SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, H1, H2 and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS16, CS19, CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010); National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010) and PPG13 (Transport) were also relevant to the determination of the application.
46. ROSEBANK COTTAGE AND LAND ADJOINING, INCLUDING PART OF FORMER PLAYING FIELDS, STUDLAND ROAD - 10/00565/R3OL Rosebank Cottage and land adjoining, including part of former playing fields, Studland Road Southampton SO16 9BB
AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION PROPOSED BY COUNCILLOR LETTS AND SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR THOMAS
‘that the provision for 35% affordable housing of the development on the site as set out in the proposed Section 106 Agreement be amended to 45%’
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION WAS LOST
RECORDED VOTE: FOR: Councillors Fitzhenry, Jones, Osmond, Samuels and Slade AGAINST: Councillors Letts and Thomas
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE UNAMENDED OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
- 62 -
RESOLVED
(i) that approval be given for the stopping up of that piece of public highway in Studland Road forming the existing site access under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act necessary to allow the development to proceed;
(ii) that the Planning and Development Manager be delegated authority to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a Section106 Legal Agreement to secure the following together with the additional condition set out below:-
(a) Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended); (b) A financial contribution towards strategic transport projects for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG/D; (c) Financial contributions towards the relevant elements of public open space required by the development in line with polices CLT3, CLT5, CLT6 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policies CS21 CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended), to mitigate for the loss of that part of the site which is currently protected open space:- (d) Amenity Open Space (“open space”); (e) Playing Field; (f) Play space/equipment; (g) The provision of 35% of the dwellings as affordable housing, in accordance with Policy CS15 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010); (h) Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer; and
(iii) that in the event that the legal agreement is not completed by 30 November 2010 the Head of Planning and Sustainability be authorised to refuse permission on the grounds of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.
Additional Condition
28 – Bat Survey Notwithstanding the submitted ecology report, before any demolition and site clearance takes place, a bat survey of Rosebank Cottage and trees within the site shall be conducted by the developer. The survey shall consist of a visual inspection of the building, including roof voids, and ivy covered trees plus 3 emergence checks. No
- 63 -
demolition or tree felling should take place until the bat survey has been submitted to the LPA and any necessary mitigation measure(s) has/have been agreed in writing with the LPA. Once agreed, all such approved mitigation measures shall be carried out in full prior to any demolition or site clearance. REASON: To protect nationally protected species from harm in accordance with saved Policy NE4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS22 of the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010).
REASON FOR DECISION Whereas the proposals are contrary to Policy CS21 of the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010) and ‘saved’ Policy CLT3 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), in that they involve a net loss of protected open space, the mitigation offered for that set out below is considered acceptable to allow a departure from the Development Plan for Southampton. The development is otherwise acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. In visual terms the proposals will bring improvements to the Studland Road street scene and provide a good choice and mix of general needs, affordable and family housing in an area otherwise dominated by public housing.
Notwithstanding the re-publishing of PPS3, revising the definition of previously developed land to exclude private garden land, the loss of Rose Cottage is deemed acceptable in terms of the overall planning benefits of the proposals, efficient use of urban land and improvement to the character of the area.
That element of the site previously used as a playing field, but not within the last five years, will be mitigated for through a financial contribution to improve public open space locally and this decision is taken in the knowledge that mitigation is also being secured through the partial demolition of the Old Redbridge Primary School on Redbridge Road, with reinstatement of land to create an additional new adult football pitch and informal sport training grids as an extension to the playing field to the adjoining Redbridge Community School in Cuckmere Lane, which already allows for public use of those facilities.
The relationship of the development layout in terms of existing flats at 48 to 130 Cuckmere Lane would be mitigated for in terms of existing and proposed tree planting, to ensure that occupants of dwellings closest to those other flats would enjoy a reasonable level of amenity and privacy.
Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 deemed Outline Planning Permission should therefore be granted. “Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP21, SDP22, NE4, HE6, CLT5, CLT6, H1, H2, H3, H6 and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review ( March 2006) as supported by the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS14, CS15, CS16, CS18, CS19, CS20, CS22, CS23 and CS25.
- 64 -
47. PLANNING PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS AND PRE-APPLICATION CHARGING RESOLVED that consideration of the report of the Head of Planning Sustainability detailing changes to the way the City Council would provide pre-application planning advice through the use of Planning Performance Agreements be deferred to the next meeting.
48. STREET NAMING REPORT - FORMER WICKES SITE, 81 - 97 PORTSWOOD ROAD The Panel considered the report of the Head of Planning and Sustainability seeking approval of the street name ‘Fullerton Place’ for the cul-de-sac serving the residential development on the former Wickes site, 81 – 97 Portswood Road. (Copy of report circulated with the agenda and attached to the signed minutes).
RESOLVED that the name ‘Fullerton Place’ be approved as the name for the above mentioned street.
49. STREET NAMING REPORT FOR UN-NAMED STREET ACCESSED OFF BLECHYNDEN TERRACE AND THE REAR OF THE MAYFLOWER THEATRE The Panel considered the report of the Head of Planning and Sustainability seeking approval of the name ‘Phantom Lane’ as the street name for un-named street accessed off Blechynden Terrace and the rear of the Mayflower Theatre. (Copy of report circulated with the agenda and attached to the signed minutes).
RESOLVED that the name ‘Phantom Lane’ not be approved and the names Empire Lane with Gaumont Lane as an alternative choice be submitted to the Post Office as potential names for the above mentioned street.
- 65 -
Appendix 2 PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 21 SEPTEMBER 2010
Present: Councillors Fitzhenry (Chair), Jones (Vice-Chair), Letts, Osmond, Samuels, Slade and Thomas
Apologies: Councillor Raymond Mead
51. APOLOGIES AND CHANGES IN PANEL MEMBERSHIP (IF ANY) The Panel noted that Councillor Samuels was in attendance as a nominated substitute for Councillor Mead in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4.3.
CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS Copy of all reports circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes.
52. LAND REAR OF 3 - 6 SEYMOUR ROAD - 10/00277/FUL Erection of an additional 2 x 2-storey, 4-bed detached houses with associated detached double garage and cycle/refuse storage and replacement house type to house on Plot 1, previously approved under ref 99/01407/FUL
Mr Buchanan (Agent) and Mr Taylor and Mr Wagstaff (Local Residents) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS LOST UNANIMOUSLY
A FURTHER MOTION proposed by Councillor Letts and seconded by Councillor Fitzhenry ‘that the application be refused for the following reasons’ was passed unanimously:-
(i) Out of character The proposal represents an inappropriate form of backland overdevelopment that provides inadequate garden sizes for the proposed dwellings, which involves the development of some land that was previously residential garden land. Furthermore the proposed layout and level of site coverage is out of character with the established pattern of development in the area. As such and having regard to the advice of Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing - published June 2010), the proposals are considered to represent harm to the character of the area and would prove contrary to the following Development Plan policies and supplementary planning guidance for Southampton:- City of Southampton Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010): - CS13 (1)/(11); City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006): - SDP1(i), SDP7(iii)/(v); Residential Design Guide SPD (September 2006): - particularly paragraph 2.3.14.
- 66 -
(ii) Disturbance and loss of privacy arising from intensified use of vehicular access The proposed development would result in intensified disturbance and loss of privacy to the occupiers of adjoining land, particularly the occupiers of 6 and 7 Seymour Road who abut the proposed site access, where there is a reasonable expectation that 5 other houses approved under planning Appeal reference APP/D1780/A/04/1150191, dated 9 March 2005, would be built out at the same time had these proposals been consented. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to policies SDP1(i), SDP7 (v), SDP16 (i), H2 (iii) of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006).
RESOLVED that conditional planning permission be refused for the reasons set out above.
53. 9 THE TRIANGLE, COBDEN AVENUE 10/00606/FUL Change of use from A1 (Shops) to mixed use A1 (retail) and A3 (Sandwich/Coffee Bar) (Description amended to omit decking and A5 use).
Mr Plested (Applicant) and Councillor White (Ward Councillor) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
The Panel noted the revised recommendation to delegate authority to the Planning and Development Manager to grant conditional planning permission subject to imposing a condition relating to refuse disposal and other appropriate planning conditions.
The Panel further noted the petition circulated by Councillor White on behalf of local objectors.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE REVISED OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS CARRIED
RECORDED VOTE: FOR: Councillors Fitzhenry, Jones, Letts, Osmond, Slade and Thomas ABSTAINED: Councillor Samuels
RESOLVED that authority be delegated to the Planning and Development Manager to grant conditional planning approval subject to the conditions below.
Additional Conditions
1 - Hours of Use - A3 Use The mixed use A1/A3 establishments hereby permitted shall not operate (meaning that customers shall not be present on the premises, no preparation, sale or delivery of food or drink for consumption on or off the premises) outside the following hours:
- 67 -
Monday to Saturdays 07.30 hours to 18.00 hours (7.30am to 6.00pm) Sunday and recognised public holidays 07.30 hours to 18.00hours (7.30am to 6.00pm) Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority a notice to this effect shall be displayed at all times on the premises so as to be visible from the outside. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
2 - Refuse Storage No refuse associated with the site shall be stored on the forecourt of the building with the exception of during the period of refuse collection. REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.
3 - Change of Use - Scope and Limitation without alternative permission The use of the building as hereby approved shall be limited to uses for A1 retail and a sandwich/coffee bar as provided for within Use Class A3 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any Order revoking, amending, or re-enacting that Order) and notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 shall not be used for any other use within the A3 use class without the express granting of a planning permission. REASON: To define and limit the consent to its current operation in recognition of the site’s constraints, including the limited site area, the limited space for refuse storage and the lack of extract ventilations systems which would be required for other types of cooking and food preparation, within an A3 Use class that might be likely to generate odours and fumes from any expanded cooking operations.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application and a condition has been imposed to safeguard the visual amenities of the area, including the character of the building’s shop front which is considered to be a heritage asset of local importance. This would be achieved by requiring refuse containers not to be stored on the forecourt, other than on refuse collection day. The proposed mixed use will contribute to the vitality and viability of this local shopping centre. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted. “Saved” Policies SDP1 and REI6 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS3 and CS13 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010) as supported by policy HE7 of PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010).
54. 34 NORTHCOTE ROAD - 10/00743/FUL Change of use from a 3-bed house (Class C3) to a 4-bed house in multiple occupation, HMO (Class C4)
Mrs Barter and Mr Persaud (Local Residents) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
- 68 -
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION WAS LOST UNANIMOUSLY
A FURTHER MOTION proposed by Councillor Letts and seconded by Councillor Samuels ‘that the application be refused for the following reasons was passed unanimously:-
(i) Over- intensification in the use of the property The change of use of the property from a C3 family dwelling to a C4 house in multiple occupation (HMO) in this location, taking into account the number of existing HMO’s already in the area, will result in an intensification in the use of the property, which by reason of increased parking demands, additional general activity/noise/disturbance and loss of a well-ventilated reception room enjoying a good outlook, would be to the detriment to the character of the area, the amenity of nearby residents and reasonable living conditions of the proposed occupants. The proposal is therefore contrary Policies SDP1 (i) and H4 (i) and (ii) of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review 2006.
(ii) Loss of an existing family dwellinghouse The proposals result in the loss of an existing family dwellinghouse to be replaced by a C4 house in multiple occupation (HMO) which given its location is most likely to be occupied by students. The proposals are therefore contrary to the requirements of Policy CS 16 (2) and (3) of the Southampton City Council Local Development Framework Core Strategy January 2010.
RESOLVED that conditional planning permission be refused for the reasons set out above.
55. PLANNING PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS AND PRE-APPLICATION CHARGING The Panel considered the report of the Planning and Development Manager detailing changes to how the City Council will provide pre-application planning advice through the use of Planning Performance Agreements. (Copy of report circulated with the agenda and attached to the signed minutes).
The Panel noted an amendment to the wording of Paragraph 8 of the report with the addition of the word “normally” - to read “applicants will normally have the opportunity to present their schemes…”
RESOLVED that the Proposed Planning Performance Agreements Guidance as amended, be approved for use as part of the Council’s pre-application service and added to the Council’s website.
- 69 -
Agenda Annex
INDEX OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DECISION DATE: 26 OCTOBER 2010 PLEASE NOTE: THE PANEL SHOULD IT BE REQUIRED, WILL BREAK FOR LUNCH
Agenda Item Officer Recommendation Type PSA Application Number / Number Site Address BETWEEN 9.30 AM AND 10.15 AM 5 AA REF Q18 15 10/00879/FUL / Land At Southern Corner Of St James Road And Salem Street BETWEEN 10.15 AM AND 10.45 AM 10/00409/FUL / 258 MP CAP Q18 15 6 Broadlands Road BETWEEN 10.45 AM AND 11.00 AM AG REF Q13 5 10/00889/FUL / 30 7 Shirley Ave BETWEEN 11.00 AM AND 11.15 AM BG/SL CAP Q13 5 10/01093/FUL 8 / Rear of 336-340 Portsmouth Road BETWEEN 11.15 AM AND 12.15 PM 9 SL DEL Q07 15 10/01090/FUL / Thorners Homes, Regents Park Road BETWEEN 12.15 PM AND 12.45 AM 10 RP DEL Q07 15 09/0966/OUT / Canute Road/Albert Road South BETWEEN 13.45 PM AND 14.15 PM 11 AG DEL Q07 15 10/00006/FUL / 69-72 St Mary’s Street BETWEEN 14.15 PM AND 14.45 PM 12 JT CAP Q13 15 10/00933/R3CFL / Newlands Primary School Ullswater Road BETWEEN 14.45 PM AND 15.15 PM SH DEL Q07 15 10/00521/MMA / 20 - 26 13 College Street And 29 - 35 Richmond Street BETWEEN 15.15 PM AND 15.30 PM 14 JT CAP FUL 5 187 Upper Deacon Road
MAIN AGENDA ITEMS
15 Tree Report: To confirm the Southampton (659 Portswood Road) Tree Preservation Order 2010 (see Appendix 1) without modifications / NG 16 Street Naming Report for former Vospers Site Woolston / VW
17 Street Naming Report for former site of 14-16 Malvern Road Bassett/ VW
Abbreviations: PSA – Public Speaking Allowance; CAP - Approve with Conditions: DEL - Delegate to Officers: PER - Approve without Conditions: REF – Refusal: TEMP – Temporary Consent AA – Andrew Amery, AG - Andrew Gregory, ARL – Anna Lee, BG- Bryony Giles, JT - Jenna Turner, MP- Mathew Pidgeon, SH- Stephen Harrison, SL - Steve Lawrence, SB – Stuart Brooks, RP – Richard Plume
Southampton City Council - Planning and Rights of Way Panel
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Index of Documents referred to in the preparation of reports on Planning Applications: Background Papers
1. Documents specifically related to the application (a) Application forms, plans, supporting documents, reports and covering letters (b) Relevant planning history (c) Response to consultation requests (d) Representations made by interested parties
2. Statutory Plans (a) City of Southampton Local Development Framework – Core Strategy (b) City of Southampton Local Plan Review (Adopted March 2006) saved policies (c) Local Transport Plan 2006 – 2011 (June 2006) (d) Hampshire County Structure Plan 1996-2011 (review) - the Joint Structure Plan for the counties of Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton 2000. (e) Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan 1998.
3. Statutory Plans in Preparation
4. Policies and Briefs published and adopted by Southampton City Council (a) Greening the City - (Shoreburs; Lordsdale; Weston; Rollesbrook Valley; Bassett Wood and Lordswood Greenways) - 1985-1995. (c) Women in the Planned Environment (1994) (d) Advertisement Control Brief and Strategy (1991) (e) Nature Conservation Strategy (1992) (g) Economic Development Strategy (1996) (h) Banister Park (1991) (i) Bassett Avenue (1982) (k) Howard Road (1991) (l) Lower Freemantle (1981) (m) Mid Freemantle (1982) (n) Westridge Road (1989) (o) Westwood Park (1981) (p) Test Lane (1984) (q) Northam Road Area Improvement Strategy (1987) (r) Houses in Multiple Occupation (1990) (s) Residential Standards (1989) (u) Vyse Lane/58 French Street (1990) (v) Tauntons College Development Guidelines (1993) (w) Old Woolston Development Control Brief (1974) (x) Cranbury Place (1988) (y) Carlton Crescent (1988) (z) Old Town (1974)
(aa) Oxford Street (1982) (ab) The Avenue (1988) (ac) Bassett Green Village (1987) (ad) Old Woolston and St Annes Road (1988) (ae) Itchen Valley (1993) (af) Itchen Valley Strategy (1993) (ai) Portswood Residents’ Gardens Conservation Area Character Appraisal (1999) (ak) Land between Aldermoor Road and Worston Road Development Brief (1997) (al) The Bevois Corridor Urban Design Framework (1998) (am) Southampton City Centre Urban Design Strategy (2000) (an) St Mary’s Place Development Brief (2001) (ao) Ascupart Street Development Brief (2001) (ap) Design Guidance for the Uplands Estate (Highfield) Conservation Area 1993 (aq) Design Guidance for the Ethelburt Avenue (Bassett Green Estate) Conservation Area (1993) (ar) Canute Road Conservation Area Character Appraisal (1996) (as) The Avenue Conservation Area Character Appraisal (1997) (at) St James Road Conservation Area Character Appraisal (1996) (au) Old Town Development Strategy (2004)
5. Documents relating to Highways and Traffic (a) Hampshire C.C. - Movement and Access in Residential Areas (b) Hampshire C.C. - Safety Audit Handbook (c) Southampton C.C. - Cycling Plan (June 2000) (d) Southampton C.C. - Access for All (March 1995) (e) Institute of Highways and Transportation - Transport in the Urban Environment (f) I.H.T. - Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines (g) Freight Transport Association - Design for deliveries (h) DETR Traffic Advisory Leaflets (various)
6. Planning related Government Circulars in most common use (a) Planning Obligations 1/97 (b) Planning Controls over Hazardous Uses 11/92 (c) The Use of conditions in planning permissions 11/95 (d) Planning out Crime 5/94 (e) Environmental Impact Assessment 2/99 (f) Development and Flood Risk 30/92 (g) Planning Controls over Demolition 10/95 (h) Planning and Affordable Housing 6/98 (i) Planning and the Historic Environment 14/97 (j) Prevention of Dereliction through the Planning System 2/98 (k) Air Quality and Land Use Planning 10/97 (l) Town and Country Planning General Regulations 19/92 (m) Planning and Affordable Housing 6/98
7. Government Policy Planning Advice (a) PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (February 2005) (b) PPG2 Green Belts (January 1995 - Amended March 2001) (c) PPS3 Housing (November 2006) (d) PPG4 Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms (November1992) PPG5 Simplified Planning Zones (November 1992) (e) PPS6 Planning for Town Centres (March 2005) PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas (August 2004) (f) PPG8 Telecommunications (August 2001) (g) PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (August 2005) (h) PPS10 Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (July 2005) (i) PPS11 Regional Spatial Strategies (September 2004) (j) PPS12 Local Development Frameworks (September 2004) (k) PPG13 Transport (March 2001) (l) PPG14 Development on Unstable Land (1990) (m) PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment (September 1994) (n) PPG16 Archaeology and Planning (November 1990) (o) PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation (July 2002) (p) PPG18 Enforcing Planning Control (December 1991) (q) PPG19 Outdoor Advertising Control (March 1992) (r) PPG20 Coastal Planning (September 1992) (s) PPG21 Tourism (1992) (t) PPS22 Renewable Energy (August 2004) (u) PPS23 Planning and Pollution Control (November 2004) (v) PPG24 Planning and Noise (September 1994) (w) PPG25 Development and Flood Risk (July 2001) (x) Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (July 2004)
8. Other Published Documents (a) Planning for Daylight and Sunlight - DOE (b) Coast and Countryside Conservation Policy - HCC (c) The influence of trees on house foundations in clay soils - BREDK (d) Survey and Analysis - Landscape and Development HCC (e) Root Damage to Trees - siting of dwellings and special precautions - Practice Note 3 NHDC (f) Shopping Policies in South Hampshire - HCC (h) Buildings at Risk Register SCC (1998) (i) Southampton City Safety Audit (1998) (j) Urban Capacity Study 2005 – 2001 (March 2006)
9. Other Statutes a) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 b) Human Rights Act 1998
Partially Revised: 29.01.2010 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5
Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address:
Martins Garage Services 53 Salem Street SO15 5QE - 10/00879/FUL Land at Southern Corner of St James Road and Salem Street
Proposed development:
Erection Of A Two Storey Building Comprising Of Food Retail Unit At Ground Floor (270. Sq.M) And 4 Flats At First Floor (4X1- Bed) With Associated Bin And Cycle Storage, Associated Parking For The Retail Unit And Siting Of Condenser Unit To Rear.
Application 10/00879/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Mathew Pidgeon Public speaking 5 minutes time Last date for 24/08/2010 Ward Shirley determination: Reason for Objectors, including Ward Councillors Dean Panel Referral Cllr Dean and Alan Matthews Whitehead MP, Mead have raised additional reasons for refusal which have not been included in the recommendation
Applicant : Mr Simon Reeas Agent: Owen Davies Architects
Recommendation Refuse Summary
Reason For Refusal
01.REFUSAL REASON - Design
Whilst the principle of a mixed use redevelopment scheme is accepted, the proposed development will, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, result in an incongruous addition to the streetscene by reason of its poor/confused design solution, its relationship with the existing pattern of development and the excessive site coverage (building and hard-standing) with a limited setting to the building. Furthermore:-
1
(a) The proposed building's footprint and width, associated hard-standing and overall layout results in an excessive site coverage that fails to respond to the spatial characteristics and building to plot ratios of its context;
(b) The emphasis of the proposed design and layout on access, parking, and servicing which dominate the frontage results in a building that places these needs ahead of a legible design solution;
(c) The proposed refuse storage facility is insufficient in scale to accommodate refuse bins capable of serving the needs of the occupants of the proposed residential units.
The combination of these design weaknesses results in a building that fails to respect the character of the area or introduce a building of significant architectural merit and, as such, the proposed development is considered to be contrary to "saved" policies SDP7 (iii) (iv) (v) and SDP9 (i) (iv) (v) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS13 of the adopted Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010) as supported by the relevant sections of the Council's approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006).
02.REFUSAL REASON - Residential Environment
The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed first floor residential accommodation provides an attractive and acceptable living environment for prospective residents, in particular:
(a) Notwithstanding the proximity of St James Park (and the amenity offered by the grounds to Shirley Parish Church) the proposals fail to provide sufficient external space which is fit for its intended purpose to serve the on- site amenity space needs of prospective residents, as required by adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (2006) Policy SDP1(i) as supported by paragraph 2.3.14 and section 4.4 of the Council’s approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006);
(c) Poorly located refuse storage facilities are proposed in relation to the entrance to the residential units, whereby residents will have to exit the private area serving the flats in order to use the refuse store.
Accordingly the scheme does not comply with the Council's adopted Policy SDP1 (i) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006) as supported by the relevant sections of the Council’s approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006).
03.REFUSAL REASON - Direct Impacts
In the absence of a completed S.106 Legal Agreement or Unilateral Undertaking the proposal fails to mitigate against its direct impacts and does
2
not, therefore, satisfy the provisions of Policy CS25 (The Delivery of Infrastructure) of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010) as supported by the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance on Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended) in the following ways:-
(a) Measures to support sustainable modes of transport, the strategic highway network, and site specific highway requirements (such as necessary improvements to public transport facilities and pavements in the vicinity of the site) have not been secured contrary to the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006 Policy SDP1 as supported by policies CS18 and CS25 of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010);
(b) In the absence of a commitment to undertaking an off-site highway condition survey the development fails to explain how its impacts will be managed both during and after the construction phase.
Appendix attached 1 Development Plan Policies 4 Marketing documentation summary. 2 Relevant Planning History 3 Decision notice 10/00290/FUL
Recommendation in Full
Refuse
1.0 The site and its context
1.1 The site is located within a predominantly residential area characterised by a mix of terraced, semi-detached and detached residential properties. The immediate environment and position from which the development would be most visually prominent is St James Road which is characterised by detached and semi-detached two storey family dwelling houses of traditional design incorporating bay windows and hipped roofs. In contrast to the over-riding character of the street scheme, the site opposite is currently operated as a car sales business with large outdoor vehicular display area.
1.2 The site itself is currently vacant having had all equipment removed associated with it’s former use as a petrol filing station. The corner plot comprises 690 sq.m of previously developed land which is significantly larger than the size of individual plots serving the family dwelling houses which front St James Road. In particular, the width of the plot measures 25m as opposed to typical plot width of between 8m and 9m.
1.3 It is bordered by 2m high timber panel boards and a small section of 2m high chain link fencing. The applicant has provided a copy of the marketing documentation produced by Nigel Lawrence Partnership within which it is confirmed that the site has been vacant since 1999.
3
1.4 The site is allocated within the local plan for housing and it should be noted that the site opposite, the car sales business, is also allocated for housing. The site is not within a primary or secondary retail frontage area nor is it within a district or local centre. The site is within a low accessibility area.
1.5 The closest retail unit (licensed convenience store) to the site is situated on Twyford Avenue approximately 200m walk away to the North East. The opening hours for the store are 06.00 - 22.00.
1.2 The closest areas of public amenity to the site are Shirley Parish Church grounds (approximately 120m to the North West) and St. James Park (approximately 250m to the North West).
2.0 Proposal
2.1 The proposal would see the re-development of the former petrol service station with a mixed use development incorporating 270 Sq.M of commercial floor space at ground floor level with 4 single bedroom residential flats located above.
2.2 The residential units would not be allocated any off street parking. All parking facilities associated with the development will be made available to the customers of the commercial unit with one being allocated for disabled users.
2.3 The proposal provides 55 Sq.M of amenity space for the occupants of the residential units along with refuse and cycle storage facilities.
2.4 The proposal seeks to address the reasons for refusal raised during the determination of the previous application with reference 10/00290/FUL, as fully detailed in Appendix 3 .
2.5 The proposed opening hours for the retail unit are 06.00 – 23.00 seven days per week.
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
4.0 Relevant Planning History
Refer to Appendix 2.
4
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners, placing a press advertisement (12.08.2010) and erecting a site notice 05.08.2010. At the time of writing the report 17 representations have been received including objections from Cllr Dean and Alan Whitehead MP.
Summary of Comments:
• Opposition to the principal of a mixed use development on a site designated for housing. • There is a greater need for family housing in Shirley. • Insufficient evidence suggesting site is not capable of supporting residential development. • Inappropriate intensification of use, greater intensity than the previous use. • Retail unit considered unnecessary. • An existing retail unit is located within 200m of the site. • Larger supermarkets are located within the nearby Shirley Town Centre. • No evidence for the need of a retail store. • The claim that the petrol filling station was last operated in 2005 is disputed, it is claimed that in fact the petrol filing station closed down in 1999.
• Impact on neighbouring amenity including impact of plant equipment. • Opening hours of the shop would reduce the amenities of first floor residents. • Refuse collection from shop - harm to residential amenity. • Increased potential for anti social behaviour. • Design not in keeping (scale and mass) creating a visually unappealing development. • Balconies are out of character.
• Inadequate amenity space. • Poor natural surveillance from ground floor windows over the entrance to the residential units • Poor residential environment - lack of windows to kitchens and bathrooms.
• Congestion/parking on both Salem Street and St James Road. • Highways safety on St James Road. • Potential for vehicular accidents. • Parking area to the front will be difficult to manage for customer use only
5.2 SCC Planning Policy - Having reviewed the retail assessment provided by the applicant the Planning Policy Team do not believe that a mixed use scheme incorporating residential and retail is contrary to the designation of the Local Plan notwithstanding its allocation as a housing site.
5
Please note: a summary of the retail assessment, as provided by the applicant, is attached as appendix 4.
5.3 SCC Highways – Raise some concerns including that the proposed bin store is not large enough to accommodate the needs of 4 separate flats. The number of bins will need to be increased to 3no 360l bins (2x waste, 1x recycle).
5.4 It is also indicated that parking spaces for the retail unit will need to be allocated and marked out for customer use only so that residents do not dominate the parking spaces forcing retail customers to park on street adding pressure and potential obstruction to the public highway
5.5 Accident statistics provided by Southampton City Council’s Highways Safety Officer indicates that there has been just one slight accident within close proximity to the application site during the period between 2005 and 2008.
5.6 However it is concluded that subject to the revision of the delivery bay to the location on the most recent plans no objections to the proposal are raised subject to there being a section 106 agreement to cover a TRO to restrict parking in the area on the public highway
5.7 SCC Housing – The threshold for affordable housing contribution is no longer exceeded.
5.8 SCC Sustainability Team – Retail floor area is less than 500 Sq.M (278.1 Sq.M) therefore there is no requirement to achieve BREEAM. The flats must achieve Code Level 3. It is stated that the development aims to meet Code Level 4, however there is insufficient evidence to suggest how this will be achieved. It is recommended that a pre-assessment estimator is submitted to overcome sustainability objections. The applicant states that PV will be investigated. The applicant must achieve 20% co2 emissions through renewables in order to be in compliance with CS20.
5.9 SCC Architect’s Panel – 8th September 2010:
The Panel expressed a number of concerns relating the design of the scheme: • Inadequate design philosophy. • Dishonest in its physical expression of its duel function. • Replication of roof forms - poor massing of roof. • Overcomplicated design, poor junctions. • Lack of visual interest. • Forcing local vernacular on a building of this scale is wrong approach - inappropriate windows. • Unloading in reality will be a problem for highways. • Dishonest ground floor fenestration. • Totally unacceptable in design terms.
6
5.10 City Design – • Mixed use design appears confused - should it look like a commercial unit with flats above or a residential development with retail below? If the scheme was purely retail the design could be quite different and would not need to appear like a residential unit/be strictly in keeping with the surroundings. • Care would need to be taken over the type of advertisements proposed, subtle signage with down lighters rather than internally illuminated fascia boards. • The design of the roof into three visually separate elements would break up the form of the building and when viewed from an angle would appear as three separate units, thus the development would achieve some degree of sympathy with the neighbouring properties and the street scene. The pitched nature of the roof reduces bulk and mass.
5.11 SCC Environmental Health (Pollution & Safety) – No objection but would ask for the following conditions S005, S025, S030; consideration should be given to limit the opening hours of the shop, which should also limit the hours of any deliveries. Further restriction should be made to the use of delivery trolleys across the car park which can be noisy and harmful to residential amenity.
5.12 SCC Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) - Annex 2 of PPS23 considers the proposed land use as being sensitive to the affects of land contamination. Records indicate that the subject site is located on a Former Filling Station. The land use is associated with potential land contamination hazards. To ensure compliance with Annex 2 of PPS23 and policies SDP1 and SDP22 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (adopted version, March 2006) this department would recommend the following conditions be attached; L001, L010, L015
5.13 Hampshire Constabulary – No Objection.
5.14 Southern Water – The applicant will need to make a formal application to connect to the public sewer.
5.15 Environment Agency - No objection.
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration are:
• Principal of the development; • The impact on the character and amenity of the surrounding area; • The adequacy of the residential environment provided for occupiers; • The impact on highways safety; • The adequacy of the scheme in relation to sustainability objectives; and • The potential to mitigate against the direct impacts of the development.
7
6.2 Principle of Development
6.2.1 The principal of the mixed use re-development of the site is not objected to in Planning Policy terms and is not considered to be a departure from the housing allocation identified in the Local Plan.
6.2.2 This conclusion has taken into consideration the length of time the site has been vacant whilst being unsuccessfully advertised for housing development; the financial implications of the required remediation works needed should the ground floor be put to residential use; and the contribution which the proposed first floor flats would have on the housing need of the city have been taken into account.
6.2.3 The site was previously occupied by a petrol filling station which ceased operation 11 years ago. Petrol filling stations provide members of the public with specific retail functions whereby convenience products are secondary to vehicular fuel.
6.2.4 The use of the site as a petrol filling station is not dissimilar to the proposed use as both rely upon passing trade whereby members of the public come and go on a fairly frequent basis. However the length of time which the site has remained vacant has led, understandably, to local residents having grown accustom to a site which no longer attracts traffic, pedestrians and associated activity. The increase in activity associated with the mix of uses proposed is not considered to justify a reason for refusal in itself..
6.3 Impact on the character and amenity of the surrounding area.
6.3.1 The layout and design of the store has intentionally directed activity away from the immediate neighbour at number 129 St. James Road by ensuring that the pedestrian entrance is positioned centrally and the vehicular entrance to the site is positioned further away to the North West. Disturbance caused by vehicular headlights can be lessened by incorporating landscape treatment to the edges of the parking bays.
6.3.3 The proposed external plant equipment would be located 9m from the boundary with the neighbouring property number 129 St. James Road. The Pollution and Safety Team (Environmental Health) are satisfied that the equipment will not negatively affect the living environment currently experienced by neighbouring occupants.
6.3.4 The visual impact of the proposal also needs careful consideration. In particular the site occupies a prominent position on a corner of two roads. Having discussed the proposal with the Architects Panel and City Design colleagues the LPA do not believe that the proposal has managed to adequately overcome the previous reason for refusal based on design.
8
6.3.5 The requirement for residential use at first floor complicates the design and thus the result is a ‘confused’ appearance to the development and an overcomplicated design.
6.3.6 Mini supermarkets are becoming more and more common across the city however they are usually located in existing commercial centres (Local, District and Town) or within small parades of shops. Although there are commercial properties along Salem Street the dominant character of the area is residential. In which case the design philosophy has been to accommodate the design brief into a development which responds positively to the residential character, however as confirmed by city design and the architects panel, the result has failed to produce a development which is satisfactory in architectural terms.
6.3.7 Whilst the Local Planning Authority have attempted to assist the architect in overcoming the previous reasons for refusal the design philosophy and resulting proposal remains flawed. Whilst the appearance of the development is considered to be improved on that previously submitted, the building design is still not considered to be of sufficient quality or to respond appropriately to it’s context to justify officer support. In particular the design cannot be considered to be a good example of 21st century contemporary architecture which appropriately responds to the local environment.
6.3.8 Accordingly the appearance of the development in the street would cause material harm to the character and appearance of the area, poorly contribute to the quality of the local environment and fail to integrate appropriately into the local community.
6.3.9 The footprint of the building has been marginally reduced and as a consequence there is an improved setting to the development however having revisited relevant policies and the Residential Design Guide the view is taken that much of the previous refusal reason 1(a) remains.
6.3.10 The legibility of the design has been improved by reducing the prominence of the delivery area. The needs of pedestrians have been considered and the situation improved however the development remains contrary to paragraph 3.9.2 of the Residential Design Guide as hard surfaced areas and the footprint of the building significantly exceeds 50% and there remains an emphasis on a combination of access, parking and servicing.
6.3.11 The Salem Street elevation is now set back from the pavement edge and contains windows at ground and first floor level. The specific design of the elevation has been discussed more generally above.
6.3.12 The cycle store has been relocated so that occupants do not need to leave the site to gain entry to the facility. The cycle store is also within the gated entrance to the residential units and therefore is afforded greater protection.
9
6.3.13 The proposed refuse store is no longer proposed to be within the same lobby as the entrance to the residential units however the store is not considered to be adequate in scale to accommodate the refuse generated by the occupants of 4 one bedroom flats.
6.4 Proposed residential environment.
6.4.1 The previously refused scheme failed to provide private amenity space for the residents, and therefore in order to address refusal reason 2 (a) the revised proposal incorporates private balconies for each of the units along with 55Sq.M of shared amenity space. Paragraph 2.3.14 of the Residential Design Guide requires flatted development to provide private amenity space for the occupants which cumulatively measure at least 20Sq.M per residential unit proposed. As the proposal is for four units 55Sq.M is well below standard.
6.4.2 The incorporation of the balconies fails to adequately mitigate against the lack of garden space provided as it is considered good practice to provide both rear garden areas of 20Sq.M per flat as well as private balconies.
6.4.3 Paragraph 4.4.4 of the Residential Design Guide, states that it is necessary for the amenity space to be adequately usable and of good quality. The shape of the proposed amenity space is acceptable and although there is a two storey scale building bordering the site adjacent to part of the amenity space (to the south) it is considered that during the late afternoon, and into the evening, sun light (certainly during the summer months) will be received by much of the proposed rear amenity space. The space is also adequately private. In which case it is only the quantum of the amenity space which is unacceptable and to improve the situation the amenity space should be enlarged and extended to the north. With regard to the balconies, at least two also appear insufficient in size. At just 3 sq.m there does not appear to be sufficient space to accommodate 'table and chairs'. 6.4.4 Although the development provides two flats which are single aspect only, the Environmental Health Team are satisfied that the development can be constructed without requiring windows to be fixed shut, it is however noted that an acoustic report and written scheme to protect the proposed development in terms of habitable rooms, balconies, roof terraces and gardens from external noise sources is required should the LPA be minded to approve the scheme. 6.4.5 Residents would no longer be required to leave the site and enter again when accessing the cycle and refuse store however the refuse store is outside of the private space proposed for residents and therefore does pose a security concern although it should be noted that the Crime Prevention Advisor of Hampshire Constabulary has not raised an objection to the revision.
10
6.5 Highways Safety
6.5.1 The Highways DC team are now satisfied that the proposal would not jeopardise highways safety. 6.5.2 It is reasonable to expect that a greater number of passing motorists, pedestrians and cyclist will stop at the site however it is unlikely that specialist trips shall be made unless customers live within the immediate vicinity of the site. The development provides on-site cycle and vehicular parking for shoppers along with a suitable delivery bay.
6.5.2 A number of objections have been received which highlight the potentially harmful impact which the development could have on highways safety. In appreciating the concern raised Highways Development Control have reviewed accident data for the stretch of St. James Road and Salem Street which is in front of the application site. The conclusion of the research has been that both roads in this location are relatively safe in comparison with other streets within the city. It is however noted that the data used to form this conclusion was recorded whilst the application site was vacant and no data has been submitted by the applicant or identified by Highways Development Control which could disprove a hypothesis that questions whether or not the stretch of road had more accidents whilst the site was in use as a petrol filling station.
6.5.3 Notwithstanding the use of historic accident data the scheme accords with the highways standards supported across the city and therefore provided motorists accord to the highway code and national road laws it is considered that the development would not significantly increase the potential for vehicular accidents.
6.6 Sustainability
6.6.1 In response to the previous refusal reason titled ‘Code for Sustainable Homes and Climate Change’ the applicant has committed to achieving compliance with CS20 and therefore if the panel are minded to approve the scheme standard planning conditions can be applied to ensure that occupancy does not occur until a post construction certificate is issued and renewable energy sources are incorporated.
6.6.2 Notwithstanding the response made by the Sustainability Team it is considered unreasonable to refuse the scheme on sustainability grounds however should the panel be minded to refuse the scheme an informative should be added to identify that any subsequent submission should be accompanied by a pre-assessment estimator for Code For Sustainable Homes.
6.7 Direct Impacts 6.7.1 The 5th reason of the original reasons for refusal relating to s106 contributions will be retained subject to the removal of (b) as the scale of the development no longer a necessitates a contribution to affordable housing.
11
7.0 Summary
7.1 The revised application is a significant improvement to the previously refused application however the development remains an overdevelopment of the site for the reasons listed above, accordingly the application is recommended for refusal.
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 The proposals fail to address a number of issues in the original reasons for refusal and remain unacceptable.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 2(c), 2(e), 4(s), 6(a), 6(c), 6(l), 7(a),7(c), 7(x), 9(a) and 9(b), and the Residential Design Guide SPD 2006 (MP 12/10/2010 for 26/10/20103PROW Panel).
MP3 for 26/10/2010 PROW Panel
12
Application 10/00879/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS13 (Fundamentals of Design) CS15 (Affordable Housing) CS18 (Transport: reduce - manage - invest) CS19 (Car & Cycle Parking) CS20 (Tackling and adapting to climate change) CS21 (Protecting and enhancing open space) CS25 (The delivery of infrastructure and developer contributions)
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 (Quality of Development) SDP4 (Development Access) SDP5 (Parking) SDP6 (Urban Design Principals) SDP7 (Context) SDP8 (Urban Form and Public Space) SDP9 (Scale, Massing and Appearance) SDP10 (Safety and Security) SDP11 (Accessibility and Movement) SDP12 (Landscape and Biodiversity) SDP13 (Resource Conservation) SDP14 (Renewable Energy) SDP16 (Noise) SDP17 (Lighting) SDP22 (Contaminated land)
H1 (Housing Supply) H2 (Previously Developed Land)
TI2 (Vehicular Access) REI1 (Shopfronts)
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) PPS3 (Housing) PPS4 (Planning for sustainable economic growth) PPG24 (Planning and Noise)
13
Application 10/00879/FUL APPENDIX 2
Relevant Planning History
Relevant Site History and Land Uses including history of pre-application discussions and key correspondence:
According to the submitted details the site has been vacant for 11 years, prior to which the site was a Petrol Filling Station with a small element of retail.
Pre app (JT):
Principal of mixed use scheme will have to be explored in greater depth. Site is allocated for ten residential units on the adopted proposals map. Officers could be flexible in order to bring this vacant site back into use however sufficient justification needs to be provided.
Architect Panel Notes 21/10/2009
• Building line should respect the existing building line of Salem Street • 2 storey scale next to 129 Salem Street – required. • Should aim to strengthen building line between 129 and 139a St James Road. • Parking and servicing from the front has a difficult visual relationship. • Query the retail use in this location (at odds with residential nature). • Limited setting to the development.
Correspondence from JT to Nick Mansfield (applicant) dated 29/10/2010: Information from letting agent is rather brief, SCC need details of how and what the site was marketed for in 2006. Responses to the marketing need to be provided. Once a full justification is provided SCC will be able to indicate whether the principal is acceptable.
Application submitted: 10/00290/FUL - Erect Two Storey Building Comprising Shop At Ground Floor (297.5sq.m) With 5 Flats Over (4 X 1 Bed And 1 X Studio) With Integral Bin / Bikes Stores And Associated Parking Area And Including External Siting Of Condenser Units To Shop. REF 28.04.2010. The 5 reasons for refusal were titled as follows (refer to appendix 3 for full reason for refusal).:
• Design • Residential Environment • Highway Safety • Code for Sustainable Homes and Climate Change • Direct Impacts
14
Pre app meeting 27th July 2010, (MP, AA, VW): Confirmed that a mixed use scheme could be considered given the need to bring development forward on this site however concern was raised regarding the constraints which such an approach would cause namely difficulty in achieving amenity space provision also potential highways conflict was highlighted along with overlooking potential. Overdevelopment of the site and respect for the character of the area is important.
Key issues • Highways. • Design/character. • Relationship with number 129. • Impact on neighbours - opening hours no later than 23.00. • Information should be provided re the plant proposed to the rear. • Revision to parking layout. • Balcony size reduction at front. • Reduce footprint. • Increase amenity space.
Letter sent to Owen Davies (agent) following further review of pre app notes provided by JT as detailed above.
• Principal of the use would not have been supported at the meeting held on 27th July 2010 had we not been led to believe that the principal of mixed use had been agreed at pre app which took place with JT. Instead a purely residential scheme would have been suggested in accordance with the Local Plan (site allocations map). However we should note that although the principal of a mixed use has been supported the scale proposed has not been. The council have always highlighted the potential for an overdevelopment of the site and confirmed that the starting point to an assessment will always be whether or not a scheme addresses previous reasons for refusal.
15
Application 10/00879/FUL APPENDIX 3
FULL APPLICATION - REFUSAL
Proposal: Erect Two Storey Building Comprising Shop At Ground Floor (297.5sq.m) With 5 Flats Over (4 X 1 Bed And 1 X Studio) With Integral Bin / Bikes Stores And Associated Parking Area And Including External Siting Of Condenser Units To Shop.
Site Address: Land At Southern Corner Of St James Road _ Salem Street Southampton SO15 5QE
Application No: 10/00290/FUL
For the following reason(s):
01.REFUSAL REASON - Design
Whilst the principle of a mixed use redevelopment scheme is accepted, the proposed development will, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, result in an incongruous addition to the streetscene by reason of its poor design solution, its relationship with the existing pattern of development and the excessive site coverage (building and hard-standing) with a limited setting to the building. Furthermore:-
(a) The proposed building's footprint and width, associated hard-standing and overall layout results in an excessive site coverage that fails to respond to the spatial characteristics and building to plot ratios of its context and the needs, safety and comfort of pedestrians and residents of this mixed-use environment;
(b) The emphasis in the proposed design and layout on access, parking, servicing and the prominence of the deliveries area as part of the projecting element of the St James' Road frontage results in a building that places these needs ahead of a legible design solution and the requirements of pedestrians and residents;
(b) The Salem Street elevation fails to include windows along its ground floor elevation and, in combination with its length and proximity to the back of pavement fails to provide an adequate setting to this elevation. This approach is inappropriate and does not respond to the establihsed pattern of development and the associated setbacks in this location;
(c) A poorly located cycle storage facility is proposed in relation to the entrance to the residential units, whereby residents have to enter the public highway between the store and the entrance to the flats. The isolated position and lack of any surveillance is symptomatic of an overdevelopment and has also raised criticism from Hampshire Constabulary;
16
(d) A poorly designed "combined" pedestrian entrance and refuse store is proposed with a visually detrimental gated entrance and lack of separation. It is poorly considered, symptomatic of an overdevelopment and has also raised criticism from Hampshire Constabulary regarding safety;
The combination of these design weaknesses results in a building that fails to respect the character of the area or the needs of its users and, as such, the proposed development is considered to be contrary to "saved" policies SDP7 (iii) (iv) (v), SDP8 (i) (ii) and SDP9 (i) (iv) (v) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS13 of the adopted Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010) as supported by the relevant sections of the Council's approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006).
02.REFUSAL REASON - Residential Environment
The Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the proposed first floor residential accommodation provides an attractive and acceptable living environment for prospective residents, in particular:
(a) Notwithstanding the proximity of St James Park (and the amenity offered by the grounds to Shirley Parish Church) the proposals fail to provide any external space which is fit for its intended purpose to serve the on-site amenity space needs of prospective residents, including external seating and areas for drying clothes, as required by adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (2006) Policy SDP1(i) as supported by paragraph 2.3.14 and section 4.4 of the Council’s approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006);
(b) The creation of 4 single aspect flats (3 of which have been designed with habitable rooms served by fixed shut openings and mechanical ventilation due to the site's proximity to traffic and off-site noise) will lead to unacceptable and claustrophobic living conditions. As such the development would be contrary to policies SDP1 (i) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS13 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010). The proposals would also be likely to prove contrary to LPR policies SDP16 (ii) and H2 (iii), as supported by PPG4 (Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms - paragraph 18) and PPG24 (Planning and Noise - paragraph 12 and paragraphs 3 and 4 of Annex 1), if ultimately no sealed glazing came to be fitted in the flats fronting St James Road;
(c) Poorly located refuse and cycle storage facilities are proposed in relation to the entrance to the residential units, whereby residents have to enter the public highway between the cycle store and the entrance to the flats. The refuse storage is ventilated via the main residents entry lobby with conflicts arising between openings;
17
Accordingly the scheme does not comply with the Council's adopted Policy SDP1 (i) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006) as supported by the relevant sections of the Council’s approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006).
03.REFUSAL REASON - Highway Safety
The proposed development by reason of its footprint and vehicular parking layout, which includes an informal delivery arrangement that conflicts with the proposed on-site customer parking area and may result in delivery vehicles reversing out onto St James Road, will give rise to highway safety concerns and vehicular and pedestrian conflicts. Furthermore, the proposed mixed-use scheme is likely to result in a displacement of car parking onto the public highway around the junction of St James Road and Salem Street leading to a possible conflict with existing sightlines, added congestion and an obstruction of the public highway. Accordingly the scheme fails to comply with "saved" policies SDP4, SDP11 and TI2 of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) as supported by the relevant sections of the Council's approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006).
04.REFUSAL REASON - Code for Sustainable Homes and Climate Change In the absence of any commitment to the Code for Sustainable Homes, an improvement of energy and water efficiency, sustainable urban drainage and a low carbon development the application has failed to demonstrate that it can satisfy the requirements of the adopted LDF Core Strategy Policy CS20 as supported by Part 7 of the Council's approved Residential Design Guide SPD (2006) which seek to contribute towards tackling climate change as required by the Council's Climate Change Strategy (2004) and PPS1.
05.REFUSAL REASON - Direct Impacts
In the absence of a completed S.106 Legal Agreement or Unilateral Undertaking the proposal fails to mitigate against its direct impacts and does not, therefore, satisfy the provisions of Policy CS25 (The Delivery of Infrastructure) of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010) as supported by the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance on Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended) in the following ways:-
(a) Measures to satisfy the public open space requirements of the development have not been secured. As such the development is also contrary to the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) Policy CLT5 as supported by Policy CS21 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010);
(b) In the absence of an agreement to secure the proposed tenure the development triggers the need for an affordable housing contribution and without such a commitment the scheme fails to assist the City with its current housing needs issues and, as such, is contrary to Policy CS15 of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010);
18
(c) Measures to support sustainable modes of transport, the strategic highway network, and site specific highway requirements (such as necessary improvements to public transport facilities and pavements in the vicinity of the site) have not been secured contrary to the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006 Policy SDP1 as supported by policies CS18 and CS25 of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010);
(d) In the absence of a commitment to undertaking an off-site highway condition survey the development fails to explain how its impacts will be managed both during and after the construction phase.
Note to Applicant: This final reason for refusal could be overcome following the submission of an acceptable proposal and the completion of a S.106 legal agreement which address each of the above points.
Note to Applicant
1. Section 106A Informative
The applicant is advised that the third reason for refusal could be overcome following the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement to support an acceptable scheme.
IMPORTANT NOTE TO APPLICANT This decision has been made in accordance with the submitted application details and supporting documents and in respect of the following plans and drawings.
Drawing No: Version Description: Date Status: : Received:
01 Floor Plan 02.04.2010 Refused
02 Elevational Plan 02.04.2010 Refused
10-012-01 Site Survey 02.04.2010 Refused
1010-010 Block Plan 02.04.2010 Refused
Design and Access Refused Statement
19
Application 10/00879/FUL APPENDIX 4
Marketing documentation summary:
• In July 1999 the site was decommissioned with all identified subsurface tanks and flow lines removed. • The site was originally marketed during late 2005. • It was considered uneconomic for residential development due to the need for further remediation. • In 2006 the property was withdrawn from the market. • In 2008 decommissioning works were completed. • Site remarketed early to mid 2009. • Due to nature of ongoing works some form of commercial use at ground floor is considered the most suitable use from an economic point of view.
20
21 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 6
Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26 OCTOBER 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address:
258 Broadlands Road SO17 3AS
Proposed developme nt:
Part Two Storey Part Single Storey Rear Extension To A C4 (HMO) Dwelling House To Create A Property With 5 Bedrooms And Shared Communal Facilities.
Application 10/00409/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Mathew Pidgeon Public speaking 5 minutes time Last date for 25.08.2010 Ward Swaythling determination: Reason for Panel The application is Ward Councillors Cllr Jane Odgers Referral: seeking to enlarge an Cllr Edward Osmond existing C4 (HMO). Cllr Maureen Turner
Applicant : Mr And Mrs Sahota Agent: Sanders Design Services Ltd
Recommendation Conditionally approve Summary
Reason for Granting Permission
The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. A family home can be re-established as there are only external physical changes proposed. The occupation of this property is not considered likely to result in an intensification of activity resulting in a material increase in the level of noise and refuse generated from the site. Other material considerations including the impact on the amenity of adjoining occupiers or the character of the street have been considered and are not judged to have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application, and where applicable conditions have been applied in order to satisfy these matters. The scheme is therefore judged to be in accordance with Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and thus planning permission should therefore be granted.
Policies - SDP1, SDP7, SDP9 and H4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006); and CS13 and CS16 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010).
Appendix attached
1 Development Plan Policies
1
Recommendation in Full
Conditionally approve
1.0 The site and its context
1.1 The application site comprises of a two storey semi-detached property located on the northern side of Broadlands Road towards the end closest to the University. The dwelling has an established use as a C4 (HMO) dwelling house.
1.2 Land levels change from the front of the plot to the rear whereby at present the ground floor of the property is set 0.5m lower than the level of the garden surface.
1.3 The neighbouring property, number 256, has been converted into flats along with its semi-detached partner number 254. The two properties both have large flat roofed, two storey rear extensions.
1.4 At present the semi detached partner to this property, number 260, shares the same rear building line as the host dwelling at both first and second floor level. The rear window at first floor level serves a kitchen which has a table to allow dining. At ground floor level there is a window which serves a bathroom.
1.5 Between 258 and 260 Broadlands Road the boundary treatment is a 2.4m high close boarded fence. The boundary between the host dwelling and number 256 is a low 1m high timber fence.
1.6 The surrounding pattern of development is characterised by family dwelling houses of traditional design. Owing to the proximity of the road to the University of Southampton (0.17miles in a straight line to the centre of the campus or 0.5miles using public footpaths) many of the properties in the road have become C4 dwelling houses. Having researched the councils HMO Private Sector Housing records along with the Electoral Register, 72 properties have been identified as being occupied by three or more unrelated individuals out of a total of 284 residential properties. The percentage of identified C4 properties (HMOs) to C3 properties (dwelling houses) is 25%.
2.0 Proposal
2.1 The proposal seeks to extend the property rather than change its use. The additional structure would be part single storey and part two storey in nature. The single storey element would project 4.5m to the rear, have a 3.2m high ridge and 2.3m high eaves. The width of the single storey element of the extension would be 3.7m.
2.2 The first floor element is narrower and would be the same width as the dog leg and project 1.5m from the existing rear wall.
2.3 The ground floor addition would create a new lounge for the residents of the property which is accessed through the existing kitchen. The extension would be set into the ground so that the internal floor level of the property is extended without the need for any internal steps. A new access point to the garden will be created from the new lounge where there will be a new patio area which will lead to two steps leading up onto the turfed garden area.
2
2.4 The first floor extension would increase the size of one of the first floor bedrooms.
2.5 The proposal would result in the property having an improved living environment for the 5 occupants residing within the 5 bedroom dwelling house and the remaining garden area will be in excess of 100sq.m.
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
4.0 Relevant Planning History
4.1 N/A.
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners. At the time of writing the report no representations have been received from surrounding residents.
5.2 SCC Highways - No Objection.
5.3 SCC Private Sector Housing – No record of an HMO on the site.
5.4 SCC Environmental Health (Pollution & Safety) – No record of noise complaints in relation to the host dwelling or neighbouring properties.
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: i. The principle of development; ii. The impact on Character and amenity of the surrounding area; iii. The adequacy of the amenity space provided; and iv. The implications of the development in relation to PPS3.
6.2 Principle of Development
6.2.1 The application is for an extension to rather than a change of use of the property. The principle should therefore be assessed on the impact the physical form of the development would have on the amenity of adjacent occupiers and the character of the area. The proposal would provide the occupants of the property with enlarged living space but would not increase the number of bedrooms. The potential number of occupants could therefore be restricted provided appropriate planning conditions are applied.
6.2.2 The proposal would create an improved standard of accommodation for residents of the dwelling.
3
6.2.3 As the proposal does not introduce any physical sub-division of the property it would be possible to return the dwelling back to C3 use using permitted development rights without any physical changes to the structure of the property or the external amenity area being required.
6.3 Character and amenity of the surrounding area;
6.3.1 The rearward projection of the neighbouring building at number 256 and 254 means that the proposal will not create additional amenity problems to those neighbouring residents in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy.
6.3.2 The additional 1.5m projection at first floor level is not considered to significantly reduce outlook from the habitable room windows positioned in the side elevation of number 256 which faces the flank elevation of the host dwelling. The proposal also accords with the 45 degree code when viewed from the habitable room window facing the rear of number 260.
6.3.3 The proposal includes one window in the side elevation. This window is located at ground floor level and serves a lounge. It would not normally be considered necessary to require it to be obscurely glazed, and as it serves a lounge it would not be appropriate to do so. However, given the low boundary treatment between the host dwelling and number 256, it is considered a condition requiring additional boundary treatment should be applied to prevent loss of privacy should the application be approved.
6.3.4 The position of the single storey extension on the boundary with number 260 is considered to have an acceptable relationship with the adjoining property. The orientation of the property would mean that the extension would not create overshadowing of private amenity space or habitable room windows during the afternoon and/or evening. The presence of the 2.4m high close boarded fence (controlled by the owner of number 260) mitigates the visual impact of the proposal as does the change in levels which occurs between the floor level of the properties and the gardens of the two properties.
6.4 Adequacy of the amenity space provided
6.4.1 The remaining garden area is sufficient and as such the residential environment for the proposed residents, given that the scheme will increase the scale of accommodation on site, is acceptable.
6.4.2 The development would occupy 17Sq.M and therefore the remaining garden area would be in excess of 100Sq.M. The area of garden remaining exceeds the minimum garden size for a semi detached house as defined within the Residential Design Guide and the space is considered sufficient in terms of both quality and usability to serve the level of occupancy having regard to the context of other gardens in the area.
6.5 Implications of the development in relation to PPS3
6.5.1 The loss of the garden space proposed as a result of the extension is not considered to be contrary to PPS3 which no longer considers gardens to be brown field land.
4
7.0 Conclusion
7.1 The proposed extension satisfies the requirements of the Residential Design Guide and will not cause harm to neighbouring amenity. In addition the site is considered large enough to deal with the proposal and the design is sympathetic to the character of the property. For these reasons the scheme can be supported.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 2(c), 2(e), 4(s), 6(c), 6(l), 7(a),7(c), 7(x), 9(a) and 9(b), and the Residential Design Guide SPD 2006 (MP 12/10/2010 for 26/10/20103PROW Panel).
MP3 for 26/10/2010 PROW Panel
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01 APPROVAL CONDITION - Full Permission Timing Condition - Physical works The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02 APPROVAL CONDITION - Materials to match [Performance Condition] The materials and finishes to be used for the external walls, windows (including recesses), drainage goods and roof in the construction of the building hereby permitted shall match in all respects the type, size, colour, texture, form, composition, manufacture and finish of those on the existing building. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interest of the visual amenities of the locality and to endeavour to achieve a building of high visual quality and satisfactory visual relationship of the new development to the existing.
03 APPROVAL CONDITION - No other windows or doors other than approved [Performance Condition] Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended (or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order), no windows, doors or other openings other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be inserted in the side elevations of the first flor element of the development hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the adjoining residential properties
5
04 APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition] All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
05 APPROVAL CONDITION - Boundary Treatment. Prior to the commencement of development full details of the proposed boundary treatment located on the eastern boundary of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall detail how the applicant proposes to prevent loss of privacy to the neighbouring occupants of number 256 Broadlands Road. Once approved the boundary treatment shall be retained in perpetuity. REASON To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby residential properties.
06 PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Restriction on number of occupiers The premises shall only be used as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) for a maximum of 5 residents and for no other purpose unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority upon submission of a formal planning application. REASON: To define the planning permission and to ensure that the HMO meets Council's standards.
07 APPROVAL CONDITION – Use of garage – domestic ancillary use Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 the extension hereby approved shall be made available as a living room at all times for communal use by occupants of the dwelling house. At no time shall the living room be used for any trade, business, manufacturing or industrial purposes whatsoever and shall not be incorporated into the house as a bedroom. REASON: To ensure that a satisfactory living environment is created and residential amenity is protected.
6
Application 10/00409/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS16 Housing Mix and Type
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance H4 Houses in Multiple Occupation
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS3 Housing
7
8 Agenda Item 7
Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26 October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address:
30 Shirley Avenue SO15 5NG
Proposed development :
Erection of a single storey dwelling to rear of 30 Shirley Avenue with associated parking and access from Howards Grove
Application 10/00889/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Andrew Gregory Public speaking 5 time Last date for OVER Ward Shirley determination: Reason for The proposal involves Ward Councillors Cllr Raymond Mead Panel Referral development on land Cllr Dean which is not previously Cllr Matthews developed. Therefore in light of the recent changes to PPS3 it is considered that the panel should be directly involved in the determination of this application.
Applicant : Mr And Mrs B Kakya Agent: Mr Derek
Recommendation Refuse Summary
Appendix attached
1 Development Plan Policies
Reason for Refusal
01. REFUSAL REASON – Impact on the street scene
The proposed bungalow would have an isolated appearance and would fail to respect the scale, massing, vertical and horizontal rhythm of the established pattern of development within Howard's Grove, which predominantly comprises two-storey dwelling houses. As such the development would be out of keeping with the Howard's Road street scene and contrary to the following Development Plan policies and supplementary planning guidance for Southampton:- 1
City of Southampton Local Plan Review ‘saved’ policies (March 2006):- SDP1(i), SDP7(iv), SDP9(i) and(v). City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010):- CS5 and CS13. Sections 3.7 of the Residential Design Guide SPD (September 2006)
02. REFUSAL REASON - Uncertain impact on adjacent trees
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the stability and health of the ash trees along the boundary in the rear garden of 32 Shirley Avenue will not be prejudiced as a result of the proposed development, contrary to saved policy SDP1 (i) and SDP12 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and CS22 of the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010).
03. REFUSAL REASON - Car parking / Access
The provision of 2 car parking spaces to serve this level of development would exceed the Councils maximum car parking standards, as such the development fails to reduce dependence on the private motor car in the interests of sustainable travel and public health. Furthermore, the proposed car parking layout and access arrangement fails to provide sufficient driver visibility because sight lines would be obstructed by the boundary with 32 Shirley and cars parked within Howard's Grove. Accordingly the development would prejudice highway safety, contrary to policies SDP1, SDP4 and SDP5 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and policy CS13 and CS19 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010) and section 5 of the Residential Design Guide SPD (September 2006).
Recommendation in Full
Refuse
1. The site and its context
1.1 The application site comprises garden land to the rear of 30 Shirley Avenue and includes a Norway Maple tree (which is protected by the Southampton (Howard's Grove) (No2) TPO 1987) within the north-western corner and a couple of multi-stem trees located centrally within the plot. There is a level change of approx 400mm between the garden level and the highway to the rear (Howards Grove). The site is enclosed by close boarded fencing along the rear and north-eastern boundaries and a wall along the boundary with 28 Shirley Avenue.
1.2 30 Shirley Avenue is a large house. A long driveway is located to the side of the property with a garage to the rear. The immediate character of Shirley Road (numbers 20- 34) comprises large detached dwellings situated within deep plots. Plots further to the north-east have been sub-divided with development fronting Howards Grove. Planning permission has also recently been granted for a renewal of permission for residential development at 27 Howards Grove.
2. Proposal
2.1 The application seeks full planning permission to sub-divide the plot and erect a 2- bedroom bungalow within the rear garden with access onto Howards Grove. Existing multi- stem Ash and Japanese Maple trees would be removed. 2 no. car parking spaces are
2 proposed to the front of the dwelling and excavation works will be required to achieve level access onto Howards Grove.
2.2 The dwelling has no accommodation within the roof space. The bungalow has a traditional hipped roof design and would be finished with face brick and concrete interlocking roof tiles. Close boarded fencing would be installed to sub-divide the plot. Bin storage would be provided to the front of the dwelling. A 10 metre length garden will be retained for 30 Shirley Avenue. The new bungalow’s back garden would be between 8- 9m deep.
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 PPS3 Housing (2010)
3.1.1. On June 9th 2010 private residential gardens were excluded from the definition of Previously Developed Land (PDL) in the Government’s Planning Policy Statement on Housing (PPS3). Also, the requirement to achieve a minimum density of at least 30 dwellings per hectare was removed.
3.1.2 The revised PPS3 maintains that the priority for development should be PDL (Paragraph 36 refers).
3.1.3 The adopted Core Strategy (in Policy CS4 Housing Delivery) indicates that 16,300 additional homes will be provided over the plan period, with 5,750 homes to be provided on allocated and identified sites between April 2009 and March 2014. The figures demonstrate that the city has a housing supply from identified sites sufficient to meet requirements until and beyond 2018/19, without reliance on windfall sites. The change to the definition of PDL, and the Council’s current predicted supply, means that the principle of development will now be an issue for new windfall proposals for housing units to be built entirely on private residential gardens (often termed “garden grab”).
3.1.4 That said, the revised PPS3 maintains that the planning system should provide “a flexible, responsive supply of land that is managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land, including re-use of previously-developed land, where appropriate” (Paragraph 10 refers). The national annual target that “at least 60 per cent of new housing should be provided on previously developed land” remains, suggesting that residential development can still take place on other land subject to the local circumstances of each site involved.
3.1.5 It is the view of the Council’s Planning Policy Team that the recent changes to PPS3, along with the removal of the national indicative minimum density standards, are not intended to stop all development on private residential gardens. Instead it allows Councils greater powers to resist such development where there is a demonstrable harm inter alia to the character and appearance of an area. The judgement as to whether such proposals are acceptable will need to consider, amongst other factors:
• the loss of private residential garden land; • the contribution the land currently makes to the character of the area; • the impact on the defined character of the area; and, • the contribution that the scheme makes to meeting housing need.
3
3.1.6 The revised PPS3 maintains that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions, should not be accepted (Paragraph 13 refers).
3.2 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
4.0 Relevant Planning History
4.1 None.
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners. At the time of writing the report 5 representations have been received from surrounding residents which can be summarised as follows:
• Insufficient tree report because it fails to reference all trees within the garden of no. 30; • The proposed vehicular access onto Howards Grove would prejudice highway safety with driver visibility obscured by parked vehicles on the north-western side of Howards Grove; • Incongruous development because the development would stand alone; • The development results in the loss of garden land; • Impact on the boundary wall serving no. 28; • The proposed plot sub-division would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the area.
5.2 SCC Highways – Object. The site is located within an area of high accessibility and the provision of 2 car parking spaces exceeds the Councils maximum car parking standards. A maximum of 1 car parking space would be allowed. The sight lines for vehicles leaving the car parking space adjacent to the north-eastern boundary would be obstructed by the boundary and vehicles parked on the highway.
5.3 Trees - The application fails to demonstrate how the three young Ash trees within the garden of no. 32 Shirley Avenue will be safeguarded because the excavation works to provide car parking is likely to cause root severance. No objection to removal of the multi- stem Ash and Japanese Maple
5.4 Southern Water – Apply informative regarding connection to the public sewer
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: i. the impact on the defined character and appearance of the area; ii. the impact on the stability of trees on adjacent land, and; iii. Whether the level of parking provision accords with the Councils maximum standards and if the associated access arrangement is safe and convenient. 4
6.2 Impact on the defined character and appearance of the area
6.2.1 The sub-division of the plot in the manner proposed would not be out of keeping with the established layout of buildings and gardens on land between Howard's Grove and Shirley Avenue, particularly to the north-east. It is noted that infill developments have recently been approved at 68-70, 82 and 86-88 Shirley Avenue and 27 Howards Grove. As such, loss of this garden land would not necessarily be harmful to the established character. However whilst this development may not be harmful to the established grain, the introduction of a bungalow within predominantly two-storey street scene is considered out of context and would be out of keeping with the character and appearance of the area.
6.2.2 The Council’s Residential Design Guide advises that new infill development, situated part way along streets, should complement the pattern of development in the rest of the street and should be similar in scale, massing, vertical and horizontal rhythm and should have a high quality architectural detailing that is harmonious with existing adjacent development (section 3.7 refers).
6.2.1 Whilst a bungalow addresses certain constraints such as the relationship with the protected Norwegian Maple tree on site, preventing two-storey development in isolation and also in terms of outlook and privacy to neighbours, on balance, such merits do not outweigh the harm that would be caused to local character and context through the introduction of single-storey development into a predominantly two-storey street scene.
6.3 The impact on the stability of trees on adjacent land The submitted tree report is insufficient because if fails to take into account the impact of the development on three young Ash trees growing along the boundary in the rear garden of 32 Shirley Avenue. If these trees are not removed under the agreement of the owner of 30 Shirley Avenue, it is likely that works to excavate the car parking area are likely to cause root severance and would significantly affect the stability of the trees and may render then unsafe as well as prejudicing their health.
6.4 Car parking and access arrangements 6.4.1 The application site is located within an area of high accessibility because of it's proximity to Shirley Town Centre. As such a maximum of 1 car parking space would be allowed in accordance with the Councils maximum standards. The development therefore provides in excess of these standards by providing 2 car parking spaces. Over provision of car parking would be contrary to national and local parking policies which seek to reduce dependence on the private motor car.
6.4.2 Furthermore the proposed car parking arrangement would prejudice highway safety because the car parking space adjacent to the north-eastern boundary would not provide sufficient driver visibility when cars are access and egress the space because site lines would be obstructed by the north-eastern boundary treatment and cars parked within Howard's Grove.
7.0 Summary
7.1 That the application be refused. The proposed bungalow would be out of keeping with the surrounding context. The submission fails to provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the impact on adjacent trees has been properly considered. The over provision of car parking would be contrary to national and local parking policies which
5 seeks to reduce dependence on the private motor car and the proposed car parking layout and access would prejudice highway safety.
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 The application is therefore recommended for refusal.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2 (a), 2 (d), 3(a), 4(f), 5 (e), 6(c), 7(a), 7 (b), 7 (d), 7 (k), 7 (o), 7 (u), 8(a), 10(a), 10(b).
AG for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
6
Application 10/00889/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change CS22 Promoting Biodiversity and Protecting Habitats
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP12 Landscape & Biodiversity SDP13 Resource Conservation SDP17 Lighting
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing (2010) PPG13 Transport (2001) PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport & Recreation
7
8 Agenda Item 8 Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26.10.2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address: Rear of 336-340 Portsmouth Road Proposed development: Erection of 2x3-bed semi-detached bungalows with associated parking and cycle/refuse storage
Application 10/01093/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Bryony Giles Public speaking 5 minutes time Last date for 19.10.2010 Ward Sholing determination: Ward Councillors Cllr Dick Cllr Fitzgerald Cllr Osmond
Applicant : Hgs Developments Agent: Michael Weakley Associates
Recommendation Conditionally approve Summary
Reason for Panel Referral: Development on land previously used as garden.
Reason for Granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The design and scale of the proposed dwelling responds successfully to the context and character of the immediate area. It provides additional family sized homes, which make a positive contribution to the mix of housing available within this location. It also provides an appropriate residential environment for future occupants of the site without adversely affecting the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted.
'Saved' Policies - SDP1, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, H1, H2, H7, of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS16, CS19, and CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) and PPS3 (Housing 2010) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
Appe ndix attached 1 Development Plan Policies
1
Recommendation in Full
Conditionally approve
1. The site and its context
1.1 The application site comprises sub-divided garden land to the rear of 332-340 Portsmouth Road. The access to the site from Portsmouth Road is steep and the front build line of properties facing Portsmouth Road are set back approximately 12m from the highway. To the rear of existing dwellings the site is bounded by a 1.8m high close boarded fencing. The piece of land intended for development has been temporarily enclosed and is no longer in use as garden land to the dwellings they originally formed part of.
1.2 The surrounding area comprises a mix of bungalows and houses with a layout that includes backland development. The proposed site seeks to tie into the development of three bungalows on land further to the rear of this site and on neighbouring land to the rear of 247 Upper Weston Lane.
1.3 Land between the recently built bungalows at the rear of the site has been paved and laid out for parking.
2. Proposal
2.1 The application seeks consent for two bungalows within the rear of gardens 336 and 338 Portsmouth Road. Planning permission for a single bungalow on this site was granted in 2008.
2.2 The semi-detached pair of bungalows have been designed in a similar manner to those which already exist on the site. It is intended that the same materials will be used should they be approved. Each back garden would be 10m deep.
2.3 Access to the site will be taken from the existing access formed for the existing three bungalows via Portsmouth Road. Parking is made available for the dwellings on land adjacent to the site
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
3.2 Developments are expected to meet high sustainable construction standards in accordance with the City Council’s adopted and emerging policies. In accordance with adopted Core Strategy Policy CS20 and Local Plan “saved” Policy SDP13.
3.3 Policy SDP1(i) requires planning permission to only be granted for development which does not unacceptably affect the health, safety and amenity of the city and its citizens.
2
3.4 Policy SDP7(iv) requires development to respect the scale, density and proportion of existing buildings.
3.5 Policy CS13 (11) expands on this requiring urban form and scale to be considered and advocates the need to make higher densities work, being of an appropriate scale, massing and appearance.
3.6 Policy CS5 advocates that intensification and higher densities will be appropriate in some areas of the city in order to make best use of land, to support a range of local services and infrastructure and to create a residential environment with a mix of housing including smaller units and affordable housing. At all densities, residential development should be high quality, energy efficient and in line with best practice in sustainability and should maximise outdoor space, for example by providing gardens, roof terraces or balconies.
PPS3 Housing (2010)
3.7 On June 9th 2010 private residential gardens were excluded from the definition of Previously Developed Land (PDL) in the Government’s Planning Policy Statement on Housing (PPS3). Also, the requirement to achieve a minimum density of at least 30 dwellings per hectare was removed.
3.8 The revised PPS3 maintains that the priority for development should be PDL (Paragraph 36 refers).
3.9 The adopted Core Strategy (in Policy CS4 Housing Delivery) indicates that 16,300 additional homes will be provided over the plan period, with 5,750 homes to be provided on allocated and identified sites between April 2009 and March 2014. The figures demonstrate that the city has a housing supply from identified sites sufficient to meet requirements until and beyond 2018/19, without reliance on windfall sites. The change to the definition of PDL, and the Council’s current predicted supply, means that the principle of development will now be an issue for new windfall proposals for housing units to be built entirely on private residential gardens (often termed “garden grab”).
3.10 That said, the revised PPS3 maintains that the planning system should provide “a flexible, responsive supply of land that is managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land, including re-use of previously-developed land, where appropriate” (Paragraph 10 refers). The national annual target that “at least 60 per cent of new housing should be provided on previously developed land” remains, suggesting that residential development can still take place on other land subject to the local circumstances of each site involved.
3.11 It is the view of the Council’s Planning Policy Team that the recent changes to PPS3, along with the removal of the national indicative minimum density standards, are not intended to stop all development on private residential gardens. Instead it allows Councils greater powers to resist such development where there is a demonstrable harm inter alia to the character and appearance of an area. The judgement as to whether such proposals are acceptable will need to consider, amongst other factors:
• the loss of private residential garden land; • the contribution the land currently makes to the character of the area; • the impact on the defined character of the area; and, • the contribution that the scheme makes to meeting housing need. 3
3.12 The revised PPS3 maintains that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions, should not be accepted (Paragraph 13 refers).
4.0 Relevant Planning History
4.1 09/00165/FUL - Erection of a block of 3 garages on Land to rear of 336 Portsmouth Road to be used by 334-338 Portsmouth Road – Approved. 15.04.2009. [Built]
4.2 08/00002/FUL - Erection of 2 x three-bedroom bungalows with associated parking and vehicular access (resubmission) - Approved. 20.06.2008. [Built]
4.3 08/00911/FUL - Demolition of existing garage, shed and outbuildings and erection of 1 x 3 bedroom bungalow, with detached single storey bike shed - Approve. 28.08.2008. [Not Built]
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners, and erecting a site notice on the 02.09.2010. At the time of writing the report 2 representation had been received from surrounding residents.
5.2 Planning related objections are as follows; • Object the proposed driveway and additional use of it which will cause noise and pollution onto the rear garden of 245 Weston Lane.
Response – The access road which runs parallel to the western boundary of 342 Portsmouth Road is now an established access which is screened with high panel fencing. Property 245 Weston Lane sits to the rear of the site with its rear build line being 14m away from (measured from diagonally from corner to corner) from the build line of the proposed bungalows and as such it is considered that there will be no direct impact from occupiers of this property. It is appreciated that there will be an increase in trip generation associated with the increase in 1 additional dwelling on site but this is not considered to be detrimental to existing residential amenity.
• Concern that further development will come forward for land adjacent to this application site.
Response – Each application must be considered on its own merits. Should a further application be submitted full consideration must be given to planning policy relevant to that time, with particular regard had to the proposed density and potential harm that may be caused to neighbouring dwellings as a direct result of an increase in dwellings.
• Concern that the proposal will affect the privacy of 330 Portsmouth Road.
Response – The dwellings proposed are single storey in height. This coupled with the use of a 1.8m high boundary fencing will protect the privacy of 330 Portsmouth Road. To ensure that privacy is not compromised in the future, it is recommended that permitted development rights which allow additional development within the roof and extensions to the dwellings are removed.
4
5.3 SCC Policy - No specific objections to the proposal but the Case officer should note the changes to PPS 3 and consider the impact that the proposed development could have on the character of the area and the amenity of adjacent dwellings.
5.4 SCC Highways – No objections raised subject to the imposition of conditions requiring only 1 car per dwelling to be allocated and precaution to be taken during the construction of development so as to ensure that the works do not result in highway safety implications are recommended.
5.5 SCC Sustainability Team - The development will meet Code Level 3 and this should be conditioned as such. The application states that use of solar energy will be considered. It is a requirement of policy CS20 that there is a 20% reduction in CO 2 emissions through renewables, this requirement should therefore be conditions to ensure compliance.
5.6 SCC Trees - Even though the trees adjacent to this site are not currently legally protected, they do still constitutes an amenity for the area and are considered to be a material consideration in the planning process. It is therefore recommended that conditions relating to tree retention and safeguarding are imposed.
5.7 SCC Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) - No objections raised subject to the imposition of conditions relating to land contamination investigation and remediation.
5.8 SCC Ecology – No objection.
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: i. The principle of development; ii. Design iii. Residential Amenity iv. Access and Parking arrangements v. Sustainability;
6.2 Principle of Development
6.2.1 The proposal would involve the development of garden land which has been recently removed from the definition of previously developed land on the 9th July update to PPS3: Housing. PPS3 indicates that the priority for development is on previously developed land (paragraph 36 refers).
6.2.2 Whilst there is a clear presumption against development on garden land, where it can be demonstrated that the existing character is not harmed and the contribution that the garden makes is limited to the character of that site and/or area, planning applications for development on garden land should be considered with regards to the context and character of the surrounding area.
6.2.3 The government’s strategic housing and planning policy objectives in PPS3 have not changed. These include increasing sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities and delivering well designed housing in suitable locations. In addition, using land efficiently is still a key consideration in planning for housing (paragraph 45 of PPS3 refers). Good design and layout of new development can lead to a more efficient use of land without compromising the quality of the local environment.
5
6.2.4 The principle of development on this particular piece of land has been accepted in the approval of extant planning application 08/00911/FUL. This coupled with 3 no. bungalows (which have recently been built on land adjacent to the application site) results in an established pattern of residential development within this back land site. It would therefore be unreasonable to refuse this application based on the recent changes to PPS3.
6.2.5 The site is located within a low accessibility area. The proposed density level of 43 dwellings per hectare is in accordance with policy CS5 of the adopted Core Strategy which advocates densities of 35-50 dwellings per hectare in low accessibility areas. The supporting text of this policy states that intensification and higher densities will be appropriate in some areas of the city in order to make best use of the land. It is judged that the application site can accommodate the proposed density of development without compromising the residential amenity of neighbouring dwellings or future occupants of the site. The increase of one unit in addition to that currently approved will not adversely increase trip generation or noise associated with the use of the site and will not be harmful to the wider character of the area.
6.2.6 The plot size, layout and footprint of the development is in context and character with the immediate area.
6.3 Design
6.3.1 The design, scale, bulk, massing and finishing materials of the proposed scheme will not adversely harm the character and appearance of the area. The surrounding area includes bungalows and 3 no. properties of a similar design which have been recently approved.
6.4 Residential Amenity
6.4.1 The residential environment for future occupiers is considered acceptable. Adequate private and usable garden space (10m length and up to or in excess of 90m2) which accords with the RDG standards is provided and retained for the proposed and existing housing.
6.4.2 All habitable rooms are served by natural light and ventilation. External access to the rear amenity area and cycle store is provided.
6.4.3 The residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers will not be adversely harmed having regard to the separation distance from neighbouring properties, the building orientation and single-storey nature of the building. Accordingly, the building will not give rise to unreasonable overlooking/loss of privacy, sense of enclosure, and loss of light or over shadowing.
6.5 Access and Parking arrangements
6.5.1 There has been no objection from Highways DC with regards to the works associated with the access and additional movement of cars through the site. Sufficient on site turning areas are provided in order to ensure that all vehicles can enter and leave in a forward gear. The access through to the rear of the site is of a sufficient width to be shared by pedestrians and vehicles alike.
6
6.5.2 The proposal provides one car parking space per unit in accordance with saved policy SDP5 of the local plan review.
6.5.3 It was however noted when on site that parking laid out in association with approved planning application 08/00002/FUL exceeds the amount of hard standing and number of parking spaces originally approved. This has resulted in a ‘hard’ appearance to the site and one that should be softened by additional landscaping.
6.5.4 Five car parking spaces were approved to the frontage of 2 and 4 Cherry Blossom Court, whereas nine have been made available. It is appreciated that one of these car parking spaces will serve one of the proposed bungalows and the property is located within a low accessibility area, however, this remains an overprovision of parking on site when assessed in relation to appendix 1 of saved policy SDP5 of the local plan review.
6.5.5 The red edged area for this application does allow the council to impose a landscaping condition which would allow part of this hard standing to be replaced with planting, and subsequently some of the parking spaces removed. It is therefore recommended that a condition is imposed to this affect should the application be approved.
6.6 Sustainability
6.6.1 The applicant has agreed to meet Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3 in accordance with policy CS20 of the Core Strategy.
6.6.2 To further meet this policy’s requirements for new development to achieve a 20% reduction in CO 2 emissions appropriate conditions have been recommended.
7.0 Summary
7.1 The proposal has been judged to make a significant contribution to the city’s housing stock, whilst making the best use of land available. The development of the site and the increase in the density of dwellings is not considered harmful to the context or character of the surrounding area. Sufficient garden space is retained for the existing dwelling and the context and character of the immediate area is not harmed.
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 The application has been assessed as being acceptable to residential amenity and its local context. The application is recommended for conditional approval.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 2(b), 2(d), 4(f), 5 (e), 6 (c), 7 (a), 7 (b), 7 (e), 9 (a), 10 (a), 10 (b)
BG for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
7
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Full Permission Timing Condition - Physical works
The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Details & samples of building materials to be used [Pre- Commencement Condition]
No development works shall be carried out unless and until a detailed schedule of materials and finishes including samples (if required by the LPA) to be used for external walls, windows, doors and the roof of the proposed buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include all new glazing, panel tints, stained weatherboarding, drainage goods, and the ground surface treatments formed. Development shall be implemented only in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION - Residential - Permitted Development Restriction [Performance Condition]
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended), or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order, no building or structures within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes as listed below shall be erected or carried out to any dwelling house hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority: Class A (enlargement of a dwelling house), including a garage or extensions, Class B (roof alteration), Class C (other alteration to the roof), Class E (outbuildings) Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may exercise further control in this locality given the small private garden and amenity areas provided as part of this development and to protect the privacy of neighbouring dwellings in the interests of the comprehensive development and visual amenities of the area.
04. APPROVAL CONDITION - Tree survey plan [Pre-Commencement Condition]
No operation in connection with the development hereby permitted shall commence on site until an accurate plan showing the position of all trees on site has been submitted and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure easy identification of all trees to be retained pursuant to any other condition of this decision notice.
8
05. APPROVAL CONDITION - Landscaping detailed plan [Pre-Commencement Condition] Before the commencement of any site works a detailed landscaping scheme and implementation timetable, which clearly indicates the numbers, planting densities, types, planting size and species of trees and shrubs to be planted, means of enclosure, lighting and treatment of hard surfaced areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The landscaping scheme shall include the existing area of hardstanding to the south of the application site and to the front of 2 and 4 Cherry Blossom Court, as indicated on the attached plan, including the re-location of any authorised car parking where necessary.scslssl2
The landscaping scheme shall specify all trees to be retained and to be lost and shall provide an accurate tree survey with full justification for the retention of trees or their loss. Any trees to be lost shall be replaced on a favourable basis (a two-for one basis unless circumstances dictate otherwise) to ensure a suitable environment is provided on the site.
Any trees, shrubs, seeded or turfed areas which die, fail to establish, are removed or become damaged or diseased, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting shall be replaced by the Developer in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. The Developer shall be responsible for any replacements for a period of 5 years from the date of planting.
The approved scheme shall be carried out prior to occupation of the building or during the first planting season following the full completion of building works, whichever is sooner. The approved scheme implemented shall be maintained for a minimum period of 5 years following its complete provision.
REASON: To improve the appearance of the site and enhance the character of the development in the interests of visual amenity, to ensure that the development makes a positive contribution to the local environment and, in accordance with the duty required of the Local Planning Authority by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
06. APPROVAL CONDITION - Tree Retention and Safeguarding [Pre-Commencement Condition]
All trees to be retained pursuant to any other condition of this decision notice shall be fully safeguarded during the course of all site works including preparation, demolition, excavation, construction and building operations. No operation in connection with the development hereby permitted shall commence on site until the tree protection as agreed by the Local Planning Authority has been erected. Details of the specification and position of all protective fencing shall be indicated on a site plan and agreed with the Local Planning Authority in writing before any site works commence. The fencing shall be maintained in the agreed position until the building works are completed, or until such other time that may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority following which it shall be removed from the site. Reason: To ensure that trees to be retained will be adequately protected from damage throughout the construction period.
9
07. APPROVAL CONDITION - no storage under tree canopy [Performance Condition]
No storage of goods including building materials, machinery and soil, shall take place underneath the crown spread of the trees to be retained on the site. There will be no change in soil levels or routing of services through tree protection zones or within canopy spreads, whichever is greater. There will be no fires on site. There will be no discharge of chemical substances including petrol, diesel and cement mixings within the tree protection zones or within canopy spreads, whichever is greater. Reason: To preserve the said trees in the interests of the visual amenities and character of the locality.
08. APPROVAL CONDITION - Code for Sustainable Homes [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code For Sustainable Homes certification body. REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
09. APPROVAL CONDITION - Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables (Pre- Commencement Condition)
An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site, that will achieve a reduction in 20% CO2 emissions [as required in core strategy policy CS20] must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO2 emissions of the development [as required in core strategy policy CS20] must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. REASON: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
10. APPROVAL CONDITION- Land Contamination investigation and remediation [Pre- Commencement & Occupation Condition]
Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following phases, unless identified as unnecessary by the preceding phase and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
10
1. A desk top study including; historical and current sources of land contamination results of a walk-over survey identifying any evidence of land contamination identification of the potential contaminants associated with the above an initial conceptual site model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors a qualitative assessment of the likely risks any requirements for exploratory investigations.
2. A report of the findings of an exploratory site investigation, characterising the site and allowing for potential risks (as identified in phase 1) to be assessed.
3. A scheme of remediation detailing the remedial actions to be taken and how they will be implemented.
On completion of the works set out in (3) a verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming the remediation actions that have been undertaken in accordance with the approved scene of remediation and setting out any measures for maintenance, further monitoring, reporting and arrangements for contingency action. The verification report shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation or operational use of any stage of the development. Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure land contamination risks associated with the site are appropriately investigated and assessed with respect to human health and the wider environment and where required remediation of the site is to an appropriate standard.
11. APPROVAL CONDITION- Unsuspected Contamination [Performance Condition]
The site shall be monitored for evidence of unsuspected contamination throughout construction. If potential contamination is encountered that has not previously been identified no further development shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall not recommence until an assessment of the risks presented by the contamination has been undertaken and the details of the findings and any remedial actions has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Any changes to the agreed remediation actions will require the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure any land contamination not previously identified is assessed and remediated so as not to present any significant risks to human health or, the wider environment.
12. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use of uncontaminated soils and fill [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site.
11
Reason: To ensure imported materials are suitable and do not introduce any land contamination risks onto the development.
13. APPROVAL CONDITION - Material Storage (Pre-Commencement Condition)
No work shall be carried out on site unless and until provision is available within the site, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, for all temporary contractors buildings, plant and stacks of materials and equipment associated with the development and such provision shall be retained for these purposes throughout the period of work on the site. At no time shall any material or equipment be stored or operated from the public highway. Reason: To avoid undue congestion on the site and consequent obstruction to access.
14. APPROVAL CONDITION - Overhanging tree loss [Performance Condition]
For the duration of works on the site no trees on or overhanging the site shall be pruned/cut, felled or uprooted otherwise than shall be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any tree removed or significantly damaged, other than shall be agreed, shall be replaced before a specified date by the site owners /site developers with two trees of a size, species, type, and at a location to be determined by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To secure a satisfactory setting for the proposed development and to ensure the retention, or if necessary replacement, of trees which make an important contribution to the character of the area.
15. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
16. APPROVAL CONDITION - Delivery times [Pre-Occupation Condition]
No deliveries relating to construction hereby approved shall be taken in or dispatched from the premises outside the following times
09.30am to 15.00pm (Monday to Friday)
No deliveries shall take place on either Saturday, Sunday or Public Bank Holidays.
REASON: To avoid traffic congestion
12
17. APPROVAL CONDITION - No obstruction of sight lines [Performance Condition]
No development or structure shall be erected on or adjacent to the boundary with the public highway unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason In the interests of highway safety.
18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Water drainage [Pre-commencement Condition]
No development approved by this permission shall commence until a scheme for the disposal of rainwater and surface water drainage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority to prevent water discharging onto the public highway and no building shall be occupied until all drainage works have been carried out in accordance with such details as approved by the Local Planning Authority and subsequently implemented and maintained for use for the life of the development Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage provision for the area
19. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties
20. APPROVAL CONDITION - Cycle parking [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Prior to the first occupation of the development plans of the covered, enclosed and secure bicycle parking compound (including elevational and material details) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bicycle sheds shall provide for a minimum of 1 bicycles per dwelling. The development shall not be occupied until provision has been made within the site in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and shall not thereafter be used other than for the purposes for which it is provided. Reason: To accord with sustainable transport policy aimed at providing a choice of travel mode available for the staff of the premises by enabling adequate provision of a facility which is likely to reduce the amount of vehicular traffic on existing roads.
13
Application 10/01093/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP12 Landscape & Biodiversity
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing
14
15
16 Agenda Item 9 Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26 October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address: Thorners Homes Regents Park Road SO15 8NW
Propos ed development: Re-development of the site to provide 63 flats ( 1 X one-bedroom, 62 X two-bedroom) and 11 houses (4 X two bedroom and 7 X three bedroom) and one 2 X bedroom bungalow in single, two and three storey buildings with associated access and parking Application 10/01090/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Steve Lawrence Public speaking time 15 minutes Last date for 15.11.2010 Ward Millbrook determination: Reason for Panel Major, involving Ward Councillors Cllr L Norris referral planning agreement Cllr A Wells and loss of most of a Cllr D Furnell locally listed building
Applicant : Thorner's Agent: Kenn Scaddan Associates Ltd
Recommendation Delegate to Planning and Development Manager to grant Summary planning permission subject to criteria listed in report
Appendix attached 1 Development Plan Policies/National 2 Further written views of Chair of the Planning Policy Architects Panel 13.10.10
Reason for granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan set out below, and other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. The local planning authority is satisfied that the design quality and finishes proposed for the new building will be of at least equal quality to those original 1930’s building proposed to be demolished which are locally listed and therefore undesignated heritage assets under Planning Policy Statement No. 5. In addition, current rates of vacancy – particularly of first floor flats are of concern in that they could lead to lower rates of maintenance and water ingress causing damage to those buildings. Protected trees on the site would be safeguarded and where modest pruning is proposed, this would not harm the overall health and amenity value of those trees. Adequate mitigation has been set out to provide for Bats on the site. The submitted transport statement and Travel Plan create a clear argument for the level of car parking put forward. In accordance with Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, planning permission should therefore be granted.
The following policies from the Development Plan :- City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010) CS4, CS5, CS13, CS14, CS15, CS16, CS18, CS19, CS20, CS22, CS23 and CS25. ‘Saved’ policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP6, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP14, SDP16, SDP17, SDP21, SDP22, NE4, HE4, CLT5, CLT6, H1, H2, H3 and H7.
1
Recommendation in Full
Delegate to the Planning and Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement to secure:
i. Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended);
ii. A financial contribution towards strategic transport projects for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG/D;
iii. Financial contributions towards the relevant elements of public open space required by the development in line with polices CLT5, CLT6 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policy CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended):-
Children’s playspace (for the general needs housing element only) Amenity Open Space (“open space” for all parts of the development) Playing Field (for the general needs housing element only);
iv. Affordable housing;
v. Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer;
vi An agreement to pay the council or their partner company’s supervision fees related to working on the highway.
vii. With the exception of the managers living accommodation, not allow any part of the active elderly accommodation to be permanently occupied as a primary place of residence by any person under the age of 55 years old;
viii. To require the applicant to implement the submitted Travel Plan in respect of the active elderly accommodation proposed only, to appoint a Travel Plan Co- ordinator to liaise with Southampton City Council’s Travel Plan Officer and manage the implementation of that Travel Plan. And to monitor the implementation for a period of five years after first occupation of any part of that active elderly accommodation, producing bi-annual reports that are to be submitted to Southampton City Council, the last to be submitted 5 years and six months after first occupation of any part of the active elderly accommodation; and,
ix. The provision and adoption of a Waste Management Plan in respect of the active elderly accommodation to ensure that domestic waste from that accommodation is collected and deposited in the detached refuse store close to Regents Park Road, to enable its collection; and,
x. An employment and training plan related to the construction of the project. 2
In the event that the legal agreement is not completed by 15 November 2010 the Planning and Development Manager be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.
1. The site and its context
1.1 The site is located some 450m south-west of the defined Shirley Town Centre and fronts Regents Park Road, Clifton Road and Oakley Road. The site is unallocated on the Proposals Map of the Local Plan Review and sits within an area of medium accessibility. There is a doctor’s surgery within 200m of the site and a dentists practice exists close by at 35 St Edmunds Road.
1.2 Two individual trees to the Regents Park Road frontage and a group of trees to the Clifton Road frontage are protected by the Southampton Regents Park Tree Preservation Order 1965. The original 1930’s buildings on site are locally listed, affording them some degree of protection as a non-designated heritage asset under the Government’s Planning Policy Statement 5.
1.3 Those buildings are very locally distinctive in the area and laid out in an axial plan of 3 courtyards (North, Centre and South Courts), with clear views through the site via tall archways. A copper clock tower also tops one of the buildings in Centre Court and is a local landmark. These buildings are finely detailed, mainly of a grey face brick with flush red brick detailing and plinth and projecting, parapeted gablets, marked by red brick quoins at their edges. Roofs are plain tiled and the gablet roofs have a curved ‘swept’ abutment to the main roofs. The buildings are set in lawned grounds bounded by a wall and decorative railings.
1.4 The western part of the site (West Court) added under a consent given in 1968 is, by comparison, very bland and architecturally unremarkable. It’s frontage to Clifton Road is not marked by the same decorative wall railings detail elsewhere on site. An electricity sub-station compound exists within the site and an enclosed cleared/overgrown area forms part of the Oakley Road frontage, enclosed by a plain brick wall, punctuated by a decorative pair of iron gates in the same style of railings/gates on other frontages.
1.5 In total, the irregularly shaped site of 1.03 hectares provides 84 single person units of living accommodation, where 11 of these are bed-sitting rooms 33-34 sq.m area. Site levels drop 1m west-east across the site and there are 13 on-site car parking spaces in two courts, accessed via independent vehicle access points to Clifton Road. 6 tenants currently own cars. Access via Oakley Road is currently padlocked and a pedestrian gate gives access to Regents Park Road.
1.6 A two-storey detached Victorian villa (135 Regents Park Road) exists on the eastern edge of the site, which provides common facilities for the elderly residents and a warden’s flat. This building is cream rendered and its roof slate clad. The building itself and its front curtilage is not shown to be part of the application site, but is within the ownership of the applicant.
1.7 The immediate area surrounding the site is predominantly residential in character with two exceptions. These are a car repairs garage abutting the north-eastern edge of the site fronting Oakley Road and a children’s day nursery at 188 Regents Park Road.
1.8 Housing in the area is predominantly of two storey scale, but there are 3 and 4 storey blocks of flats near to the site and a single storey bungalow adjoins at 3 30 Oakley Road. There are a variety of differently coloured facing and roofing materials, with examples of terraces, semi-detached properties and detached properties.
2. Proposal
2.1 The development comprises two parts. Both would enjoy vehicular access from Oakley Road, where it is possible to form 2m x 43m sight lines. A total of 36 car parking spaces were originally proposed, albeit now reduced to 35 owing to highway safety concerns in Oakley Road. 16 are for the active elderly flats, one for each general needs dwelling and the remaining 4 given over to visitor parking. The 16 for the flats are grouped in their own enclosed courtyard by the main entrance to the active elderly flats and would include two spaces for the disabled. All would be constructed to a minimum of Level 3 of Code for Sustainable Homes.
2.2 The redevelopment would necessitate the re-positioning/re-provision of the existing electricity sub-station. An indicative location for that new structure is shown on the site layout plan, between the new housing and elderly flats, nestled into a corner of the visitor parking layout. No elevational details have yet been provided. So positioned, this structure would be visible from Oakley Road. A public sewer crosses the site and provision would be made for its diversion through an agreement with Southern Water.
2.3 The first element of the proposed development involves the demolition of all existing buildings save for the eastern clocktower part of Centre Court and their replacement with a two storey ‘H’-shaped block, attached to the retained building. The new block is arranged to create two courtyard spaces, A detached single storey bin store located within 10m of Regents Park Road would serve that building containing 60 x 2 bed flats (49 No. 68 sq.m in floorplate, 8 No. 73 sq.m in floorplate and 3 No. 82 sq.m in floorplate) for the active elderly, with common facilities. 3 of these flats would be formed in the retained building, where one of these would be occupied by the warden/manager of this accommodation. Each first floor flat would enjoy its own external balcony. All 60 would be provided on an affordable basis for rent. The applicant is a Registered Social Landlord. Integral, common facilities would comprise:- • one lounge/common room with ‘tea point’; • a laundry; • two disabled persons WC’s; and, • a secure combined mobility buggy/cycle store (6 buggies/10 bicycles shown).
2.5 There would also be a plant room containing a gas powered boiler and managers office on the ground floor. Additionally in terms of sustainable development it is proposed to employ/harness solar energy. Such photovoltaic panels would be positioned out of sight in a flat-roofed valley between roof ridges, being that in section, because the flats are generally single aspect, either side of a central corridor, there would be an inner and outer roof profile. Six stairwells and two lift shafts would provide access to the first floor of the block. All flats would have two bedrooms and be design to Lifetime Homes standards, to also fully comply with Part M of the Building Regulations in terms of access for all.
2.6 Elevationally this block would comprise alternating red/grey face brickwork (projecting bays in Grey with reconstituted stone coping detail to parapets) with contrasting plinth. All windows, doors and balcony frameworks would be polyester powder coated aluminium. The Architect has confirmed that a samples panel will be available at the meeting. A written undertaking has also been given to salvage the existing clay tiles for re-use of the new building if feasible and in good condition.
4 2.7 The second part of the development involves the construction of 15 general needs dwellings, which would be disposed of to help fund the building of the 60 active elderly flats. Those have otherwise achieved conditional grant funding by the Homes and Communities Agency.
2.8 Two terraces of 5 houses and 5 houses and a building containing 3 flats would front Oakley Road, set back from the pavement to allow in-curtilage parking at the front. The houses would be two storey in height and the flatted block 3 storeys. A semi-detached pairing of a two storey house and single storey bungalow is proposed to the rear of the first terrace, adjacent to the bungalow at 30 Oakley Road.
2.9 Elevationally these dwellings would comprise brick, reconstituted stonework, polyester powder coated window/door frameworks beneath a varied roofscape.
2.10 It is important to understand the rationale behind redevelopment. The existing buildings are no longer considered fit for purpose to house their elderly residents. Of 84 existing flats on site 28 are currently vacant (mostly at first floor level). Whereas the older buildings staircases to first floor flats are covered, they are still open to the elements and contain unsafe, blind corners. Whilst those for West Court do not suffer the latter impediment, they are completely open to the elements. These staircases can be treacherous to the elderly in wet/icy weather.
2.11 With these single occupancy units averaging at around 32 sq.m - (those in West Court are marginally bigger, but have a combined bed/living space) – the accommodation, especially when furnished – is very cramped and makes it difficult to use walking aids and for carers to assist the elderly tenants. In particular, the very small shower-rooms are accessed via the bedroom, which is not conducive to modern living nor the dignity/privacy of tenants. The site is also relatively open to intruders and tenants complain of disturbances and trouble by youths coming on to the site. Heating systems are poor, storage inadequate and there is nowhere for a guest to stay.
2.12 Conversion of the existing flats to create two bedroom flats has been considered. Whilst this would allow retention of the fine looking and distinctive 1930’s buildings, it would lessen the overall density on the site making the scheme economically unviable, lifts would need to be installed, which would be likely to detract from the appearance of the buildings and security issues would not be properly addressed. Instead, a building of quiet rhythm has been designed, so as to not compete with the retained clocktower building and abut it sub-serviently.
2.13 A number of supporting documents have been submitted with the planning application, including:-
• Design and access statement • Statement of community involvement • Affordable housing statement • Ecological survey, supported by a detailed Bat survey • Tree survey and arboricultural impact assessment/method statement • Transport Statement • Active elderly travel plan • Waste management strategy • Assessment of environmental noise • Sustainability checklist and report • Water environment impact statement 5 • Desk study, site investigation & risk assessment report
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 , along with the most relevant parts of the Government’s Planning Policy Statement 5.
3.2 Major developments are expected to meet high sustainable construction standards in accordance with the City Council’s adopted and emerging policies. In accordance with adopted Core Strategy Policy CS20 and Local Plan “saved” Policy SDP13.
4.0 Relevant Planning History
4.1 The oldest North Central and South Courts were built in the 1930’s, when earlier housing adjacent to the Southampton Civic Centre in Above Bar Street/West Marlands Road was redeveloped. The Thorners Charity was established by Robert Thorner – a wealthy merchant and philanthropist – with the express purpose of housing widows of good character and of poor financial means.
4.2 West Court was added in the late 1960’s. Consent for a warden’s house (1978) on a similar building line next to 30 Oakley Road and a small office/WC between North Court and Oakley Road (1981), were never built out.
4.3 Pre-application discussions and the developer engaging with the local community regarding redevelopment of the site occurred from May this year. Initially, the Thorners Charity had sought Planning Officers’ views on the demolition of all buildings within the current application site edged red and their replacement with 56 two bedroom flats and 4 bungalows for women over the age of 55 together with adjacent residential development for general use and associated landscaping, car parking, bin and cycle storage. The 56 flats were to have been in a single two/three storey block, turning the corner from Clifton Road into Regents Park Road.
4.4 The Architects Panel reviewed that earlier scheme and unanimously opposed it. Planning Officers concurred with that view and advised that such proposals would not provide a building of equal distinctive character to the locally listed building and thus not be supported. The Applicant’s Architect has therefore produced the scheme currently submitted to address those concerns and again explained this to the local community via an open event, where no significant adverse reaction is reported as having been received.
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners, placing a press advertisement (enter date) and erecting a site notice (enter date). At the time of writing the report 6 objections and 1 letter raising questions have been received, mostly from surrounding residents, on the following grounds:-
Principle
6 • The new buildings are of insufficient quality to justify the loss of one of Southampton’s architectural gems and local landmark buildings. The buildings play an important role in the area, have an important setting and their demolition would erode local amenity. Under "modern methods of procurement", it is already evident that specialist bricks, tiles and joinery will not be used, therefore attempts to produce equal quality will be difficult. • Commercial reasoning alone should not be acceptable justification for demolishing the majority of the buildings on site, where other private developers would find it easier to secure funding for a conversion, rather than a redevelopment. There are better examples locally of sympathetic conversion/enlargement than of recent flatted blocks which have eroded the character of the area. It is asserted that the applicant’s viability arguments are flawed and one writer offers to purchase the site to pursue such a conversion. One writer asserts that the Planning and Rights of Way Panel should disassociate itself from any development which involves major demolition of the existing Thorner’s Homes. It should be remembered that Sir Aston Webb was considered to have been one of the most distinguished Victorian architects, a President of the RIBA and a gold medal holder. He changed the architectural character of London by formalising the avenue approach with the Mall, designing Admiralty Arch and the facade of Buckingham Palace. • The site is not identified in the Council’s strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment and should therefore be refused. • Existing buildings should be renovated and converted to acceptable one bedroom flats with some additional buildings to provide visitor accommodation. • Unacceptable increase in intensity of occupation/density at the site, with insufficient social infrastructure/green space in the area to support new development. • Concern that the new sheltered flats will be visually closer to the site boundaries in Regents Park Road and Clifton Road.
Highways related matters
• Insufficient car parking to serve the development, which will contribute to greater congestion in Regents Park Road and Clifton Road, especially having regard to intended plans at British American Tobacco for a cash and carry warehouse, who are disposing of part of their site. • Concern about where construction traffic will access the site if consent is given and the scheme built out.
Amenity issues
• Overlooking via new windows looking westwards towards Lawnside Road, where none previously existed.
In addition, 7 letters (from existing tenants) and an e-mail from Councillor Mead of support have been received on the basis that the existing buildings are unsuitable for the purposes of Thorners Charity, the reasoning outlined in paragraphs 2.10-2.11 above and every alternative option has been explored. The proposals have been modified to take account of the comments of the Architects Panel. One other writer offers general support and is pleased that vehicular access to Clifton Road is to be stopped up.
5.2 SCC Highways
7 5.2.1 Conditions will be required to resolve the location of the cycle stores for the dwellings, and the bin stores.
5.2.2 There is no provision at the front of the houses for bins or bikes to be stored, so it is assumed bins and bikes will be stored in the rear gardens. The bins will then be moved to a suitable hardstanding on collection day by the residents. There is a need to identify where these collection points will be. Bike stores can be a shed in the rear gardens with a locking eye/Sheffield hoop to make the cycles lockable inside the store.
5.2.4 Concern is expressed about the run of 3 parking bays in front of the block of 3 flats, This number should be reduced to two, to aid pedestrian safety. There are parking spaces to the rear of the site which could be used as the third parking bay as needed.
5.2.5 Flatted scheme: It is noted that a waste management plan will ensure residents’ refuse is collected and taken to the common store within 10m of Regents Park Road.
5.2.6 The scheme provides for 10 cycles to be parked for residents, and the agent has confirmed a Sheffield stand for 5 visitor cycles will be positioned close to the building’s main entrance visitor cycle parking facilities.
5.2.7 A delivery and routing strategy, with timing to avoid school start and finish times, should be conditioned.
5.3 SCC Housing Development Team
5.3.1 The affordable housing requirement for this site is 35%. 75 units x 35%= 26.25 units/ rounded down to 26 units. Actual affordable units being provided is 60 ie 80% of total units.
5.3.2 The scheme currently provides 84 units of affordable housing for women over 55. The current units are extremely small. They are unsuitable for modern use .
5.3.3 Thorners have considered many ways of bringing the existing scheme up to modern, ‘Decent Homes’ standard but it is simply not practically or economically viable to do so. The current scheme is also hard to let, with significant void levels. It does not meet current housing need in the city.
5.3.4 Thorners have worked closely with the Housing Development Team, Adult Social Care and the Homes and Community Agency (HCA) to develop plans for the new scheme. They have also consulted extensively on them.
5.3.5 The proposed new affordable homes will have 2 bedrooms. As well as enhancing the lives of existing residents, these homes will be attractive to under occupiers, i.e. people currently living in homes that are larger than they need. The council has been targeting under occupiers in existing affordable housing in order to free up much needed family sized homes for those on the housing register. In this way, as well as providing 60 homes for older people, the scheme will also provide affordable family homes at each subsequent relet.
5.3.6 The HCA have agreed to provide over £4.5 million funding for this scheme. This is a significant investment for the city. A requirement of this funding is that the scheme starts on site by the end of March 2011. If this doesn’t happen it is extremely unlikely (given the current economic climate) that such a funding level would be available in the future. If
8 Thorners cannot redevelop the site then void levels are likely to increase, and the city will lose this excellent opportunity to meet housing need.
5.3.7 The Housing Development Team fully support this planning application as it will make a significant contribution to meeting current and future housing need in the city.
5.4 SCC Sustainability Team – Recommend three planning conditions to secure a minimum of level 3 Code for sustainable homes, micro-renewables and a system of sustainable urban drainage (SUDS).
5.5 SCC Environmental Health (Pollution & Safety) – Have no objections and recommend three planning conditions to ensure that the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties are safeguarded during the build process.
5.6 SCC Ecology – It is noted that a small Bat roost has been identified in the roof void of 5-8 South Court. Raises no objection to demolition between November and February, subject to an appropriate licence being obtained from Natural England and achieving the mitigation measures (placing of 10 Bat tubes throughout the new buildings) set out in paragraph 7.1.9 of the later bat survey. The “Three Tests” set out in the Habitats Regulations 2010 have been considered. Based on the information provided within the bat report and policies contained with the Core Strategy and the retained elements of the local plan (if any retained policies relate to housing need or brown field land) it has been concluded that the Three Tests have been met.
5.7 SCC Development Co-ordinator: Children’s Services and Learning – Requires that an employment and skills obligation be par of any planning agreement if the Panel are minded to support the proposals.
5.8 SCC Historic Environment Team – The buildings were locally listed in 2009 and constitute an important, historic local landmark built in 1932. They were originally designed along neo-classical lines around formal courtyards, with a feature bell tower and formal memorial inscribed by the 20thCentury sculptor and typographer Eric Gill. Two planning conditions are recommended to ensure that any archaeology on the site is investigated and recorded. Thorner Homes Regents Park Road
5.8.1 Policies relevant to Locally Listed building are set out in detail in Appendix 1 :
5.8.2 PPS5 makes a distinction between Designated and Non-Designated historic assets. Designated Historic Assets are those which are protected by virtue of their inclusion on a national, statutory list, such as Scheduled Ancient Monuments or Listed Buildings. The PPS recognises that there are many historic assets that are not designated, either because they are not fully defined (for example archaeological sites), or because while valuable, they do not meet the criteria for statutory protection. The application site falls into this latter category.
5.8.3 The key conservation issues for consideration with this application are:
• Have the policies set out in the saved Local Plan Policy HE 4 (i) and (iv) been sufficiently addressed through the application and pre-application process to justify the loss of the Heritage Asset?
• Is the partial loss of this significant Heritage Asset justified in light of PPS policies HE 7.2, 7.4 and 7.7?
9 • Given that the almshouses clearly have a ‘special significance to a particular community’ (the residents of the Almshouses), have the views of the residents been sufficiently understood to enable the application to be supported?
• Will the proposed new development make ‘a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment’ as set out in PPS5 policy HE 7.5?
5.8.4 The current proposals are the result of extensive consultation and re-design. The nature and value of the Homes are recognised in the Design and Access Statement which accompanies the application, and the latest proposals are an attempt to retain the main elements of the building (especially in relation to the relationship with Regents Park Road), while designing new structures that are of comparable quality.
5.8.5 The applicants are clear that, in their view, it will not be possible to convert the existing buildings to modern standard accommodation for their residents, and that issues with the buildings mean that there are considerable vacancy rates, with many of the less accessible first floor rooms being empty. This kind of upper-floor vacancy can be a cause for concern with historic buildings, as they can become more prone to water penetration, damp, and potentially structural problems.
5.8.6 It is accepted that the charity have commissioned their architects to look at ways in which the buildings can be adequately remodelled within the existing façade, and that this was found not to be possible.
5.8.7 The retention of the main entrance building fronting Regents Park Road recognises the contribution that the complex makes to the existing streetscape. Retention of this block, and the associated clock tower is a significant improvement on pre-application proposals to retain the clock tower only, as a feature within the new development. The scaling down of the new development and greater attention to details such as materials, openings, and the rhythm of the new build also recognises the quality of the existing structures.
5.8.8 Apart from the quality of the structures themselves, a significant aspect of the current building is the quality of the spaces between, comprising three enclosed courtyards laid to grass. These are quiet spaces within the site designed for residents to sit out in comfort. The principle of these courtyards has been reflected in the design of the large east and west open spaces, and significantly, with the retention of the grassed area fronting Regents Park road, and the retention of the existing wall and railings.
5.8.9 The key factor in terms of the acceptability or otherwise (in heritage terms) is whether or not the proposed new build makes a positive contribution to the historic environment. That is to say, will the new development be of either equal or better quality than the existing?
5.8.10 The scale and height of the current proposals are more sympathetic than the original proposals. Creating barn hips where the roof currently breaks to form the step back will go a long way to resolving the issue of the relationship between the new build and the retained clocktower building.
5.8.11 To tie in with the language of the existing Alms Houses, the architect should consider introducing quoin detailing to the Gablets, which will help to reduce the visual impact of these structures.
10 5.8.12 Subject to this information being provided, and the changes outlined above being made, the HET can cautiously welcome these proposals.
5.9 Architect’s Panel – Cannot support the loss of this rare and important piece of Arts and Crafts housing without seeing a scheme of equivalent quality, albeit the Chair acknowledges that refit of specialist housing requiring lifts to first floor accommodation, makes retention more difficult. Formal Listing of the 1930’s buildings should be considered, because apart from the Herbert Collins developments in Bassett, Southampton has very few remarkable Arts and Crafts housing complexes.
5.9.1 Whereas the two storey scale and courtyard layout was supported, there was no support for (as originally submitted) glazed link element running parallel to Regents Park Road, as this would not follow the geometry of the block and only seems to offer additional circulation and would be difficult to make seem ‘ephemeral’. Gablets (as originally submitted) seem to be ‘stuck’ on, not replicating the high quality detailing and proportions of the retained/existing 1930’s buildings, nor roof pitch.
5.9.2 The geometry, fenestration and detailing of the new building ought to follow the retained building and same ethos should be applied to the new housing fronting Oakley Road.
5.9.3 The separation between the main block and nearest house was considered poor and adequacy of parking quantum was queried.
5.9.4 The further written views of the Chair of the Architects Panel are set out as Appendix 2 , expanding upon the above themes of concern.
5.10 Hampshire Constabulary – Believe that Part II compliance with ‘Secured by design’ should be possible. Security to window/doorsets of the new Oakley Road housing should be achievable to the relevant British Standard. It is noted that sheltered accommodation is prone to criminal abuse, where there is often an increase in distraction burglary/rogue trading. Liaison with the developer to improve the scheme is counselled.
5.11 Southern Water – Report that a public sewer crosses the site, and that diversion with 3m wayleaves either side of the new line will only be supported if there is no loss of hydraulic capacity, no soakaways positioned within 5m of the new line and no planting within 3m of the new line. The sewer would need to be protected during the build. If hydraulic capacity cannot be maintained, the implication is to require an amendment to the submitted site layout. Conditions and informatives are recommended for any favourable decision. The long term maintenance of SUDS is to be clarified as Southern Water will not adopt such systems.
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: • Principle of redeveloping a non-designated heritage asset • Density, garden land and visual impact to the character of the area • Highways matters • Amenity issues and living conditions
6.2 Principle of Development
11 6.2.1 The existing accommodation is clearly unsuitable for its elderly tenants. Conversion and adaptation of the 1930’s buildings has been investigated but would be unviable and could compromise the appearance of these buildings.
6.2.2 Residential use of the site is established and supportable. The proximity of the site to the Shirley Town Centre, local health care and other amenities via good connections from public transport make this a very sustainable location for sheltered flats.
6.2.3 The main issue arising from these proposals is whether the new block and its attachment to the retained 1930’s clocktower building, is off sufficient architectural merit and character to justify the loss of the other 1930’s buildings, which the Architects Panel regard as a fine example of ‘rare and important piece of Arts and Crafts housing’, which is locally distinctive to the area, is locally listed and therefore under PPS 5 a non-designated heritage asset.
6.2.4 An iterative design dialogue has occurred with the Architect before and since the submission of the application. A series of adjustments have taken place in the evolution of the scheme to seek to address concerns raised by the Architects Panel. The two storey scale and courtyard layout have the Architects Panel support in principle. Further adjustments have been made to reflect the detailed qualities of the retained building, which include:-
• Deletion of a double height glazed corridor that would have run parallel to Regents Park Road, linking the retained building with an element of the new block, fully enclosing a new courtyard otherwise visible from Regents Park Road. • Adjusting the roof profile to match the pitch of the retained building, where gablet roofs will be subservient to the main roof ridge and abut it via curved valley tiles, with hips treated with bonnet tiles and plain tiles used throughout. Adjusting the main ridge line, such that hipped, rather than gabled elements now break up the ridge line and massing, with ‘dummy’ chimney stacks added for further punctuation. • Changing the detailing of the projecting gablets, so that red brick quoins are added to the edges and adding a further projecting gablet on the corner of the building closest to Regents Park Road, to compliment the appearance of those on the retained clocktower. • Adjusting window opening proportions to appear ‘portrait’ rather than ‘landscape’ in character, defining their heads, (projecting) cills (and mullions for double window units) with contrasting brickwork. • Adjusting the detailing of the proposed projecting balconies, to have more slender bespoke supporting columns, to be coloured grey to blend with the main grey face brickwork.
6.2.5 With the above adjustments, Officers are content that a building of at least equal merit, visually and in terms of layout, within landscaped grounds, could be built to justify the loss of most of the 1930’s locally listed buildings, subject to the build quality being tightly controlled by planning conditions.
6.2.6 Whilst coming closer to each street frontage, an adequate landscaped setting would still be provided for the new building in Regents Park Road and Clifton Road. In the latter street there would be an improvement to the street scene. Whilst the street scene in Oakley Road would be of lesser visual quality to the elevation currently presented by North Court, in overall terms the visual impact to the area arising from re-development would be positive and contribute to the provision of modern sheltered accommodation and family housing.
12 6.3 Density, garden land and visual impact to the character of the area
6.3.1 The landscaped grounds o the existing buildings do provide an amenity, but are not strictly individual private gardens. The removal of ‘garden land’ in the adjusted description of previously developed land in PPS3 does not provide a requirement to refuse all such applications, but merely reinforces a local planning authority’s hand should it feel the character of the area would be unacceptably denuded by allowing such land to be developed.
6.3.2 A detailed hard and soft landscape design has been submitted and protected trees would be safeguarded during construction/ be capable of retention, with some modest pruning to allow scaffolding to be erected.
6.3.3 The Council’s Tree Officer is satisfied with the submitted arboricultural method statement, where protecting can be conditioned in accordance with the submitted statement of working near to these trees.
6.3.4 The density at 72.8 d/ha (compared to the existing density of 81.5 d/ha) actually represents a decrease and is compliant with Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy, which recommends a minimum density between 50-100 d/ha in zones of medium accessibility.
6.3.5 Overall and as concluded visually above, the character of the area would be preserved and in some cases enhanced.
6.4 Highways matters
6.4.1 The applicants transport consultant calculates that an additional 4 multi-modal trips will be generated by the development and that the impact of this on the local highways network will be minimal. 25 buses per hour covering 10 different services are available/close to the site giving excellent linkage to amenities/places of employment. The Highways Team does not raise any objections to the proposals on safety grounds. A single, secure and well-surveilled point of access is supported from Oakley Road and adequate sight lines can be provided. Adequate servicing and minimum cycle parking can be provided.
6.4.2 The quantum of car parking at 36 spaces is less than the 42 that could be provided as a maximum. However, regard needs to be had to the purpose of the majority of the dwellings proposed - (to be controlled through the planning agreement by requiring minimum age for occupation at 55 years old) - the proximity of the site to local amenities and the developer’s undertaking to manage and monitor Travel Plan in respect of the sheltered flats for a period of five years, with the aim of reducing trips by car by 10%.
6.5 Amenity issues and living conditions
6.5.1 A resident of Lawnside Road (cul-de-sac off Clifton Road) has asserted that they would feel more overlooked than currently so. The back wall of their property is some 41m off the application site’s closest kitchen windows to two of the active elderly flats. Such distance far exceeds that recommended (21m) in the Residential Design Guide and no loss of amenity is concluded.
6.5.2 The applicant has commissioned an acoustic report. This places the site within Noise exposure Category ‘B’ of PPG24 in respect of traffic noise to habitable rooms. An appropriate survey of industrial noise emanating from the abutting car repairs/MoT garage in Oakley Road only concludes very sporadic instances of tonal noise associated with 13 power tools, for example when wheel nuts are loosened/tightened on motor vehicles being serviced. The likelihood of new residents complaining about the garage is considered to be very low. Environmental Health Officers in the Pollution and Safety Team have not raised any objections to the proposals. Subject to securing the suggested mitigation from the acoustic report through planning condition, Officers are satisfied that satisfactory living conditions would result inside habitable rooms.
6.5.3 Regard has been had to the separation distances between habitable room windows and any blank flank walls, both between elements of the proposals and between adjoining dwellings and proposed dwellings. The design of one dwelling has been altered to a bungalow to address the former and a projecting screening device has been added to the general needs flatted block proposed by the adjoining repairs garage, to ensure that no adverse inter-looking can occur between its second floor rear windows and rear windows on detached Victorian villas to the south-east at 135-137 Regents Park Road. A condition will be imposed to require that device to be fitted and retained. Overall, it is therefore concluded that the amenities f adjoining neighbours would be preserved and that good living conditions would be provided to new residents.
7.0 Summary
7.1 The applicant has demonstrated that a well detailed building could justify the loss of the majority of the locally listed buildings, integrate successfully with the retained clocktower building and preserve the area’s character through its sensitive courtyard layout. Improvements to the Clifton Road street scene would compensate for some erosion of the Oakley Road street scene. The new active elderly flats block would remain a prominent building on the corner of Clifton Road and Regents Park Road and the retained clocktower building would still allow the ensemble to read as a local landmark.
7.2 An improvement to the city’s housing stock and secure living conditions for existing elderly tenants would result, bearing in mind that the elderly, which is an expanding section of the community. New family housing would be provided in within the spirit, if not letter, of Core Strategy Policy CS16.
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 By securing those matters set out in the recommendation, in terms of a planning legal agreement and the conditions listed below, the development is considered to be acceptable.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 2b, 2d, 4f, 4i, 4k, 5e, 6a, 6c, 6f, 7a, 7b, 7e, 7g, 7k, 7k, 7o, 7t, 7u, 7v, 7w, 9a, 10a and 10b.
SL2 for 26/10/2010 PROW Panel
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Full permission timing condition - physical works
14 The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Archaeological structure-recording [Pre- Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological building recording – (to at least Level 4 within English Heritage’s document “Understanding historic buildings. A guide to better recording practice”) - of those 1930’s buildings proposed for demolition has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, which has been submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the recording of the 1930’s buildings proposed for demolition is initiated at an appropriate point in development procedure.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION - Archaeological work programme [Performance Condition]
The developer will secure the completion of a programme of archaeological structural recording and assessment work of the 1930’s buildings proposed for demolition, in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the archaeological building recording of the 1930’s buildings proposed for demolition is completed.
04. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION – Salvaging of historic artefacts and re-use on site
Before any demolition of existing buildings is commenced, provision shall be made for the salvaging of historic artefacts on the site including any inscription stones and the obelisk monument for their re-use within the site, in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Once approved, that scheme of works shall be fully implemented before any new or altered dwelling is first occupied. Once that scheme of works is implemented, those artefacts shall be retained on site at all times thereafter in accordance with the approved scheme.
Reason: To preserve the historical features of the site, in accordance with City of Southampton Core Strategy Policy CS14 and saved City of Southampton Local Plan Review Policy HE4.
05. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – External materials/constructional detailing
The development shall be built out with the materials specified on the planning application form and in accordance with the panel of material samples submitted by the architect, unless otherwise agreed in correspondence with the local planning authority prior to the demolition of any part of North, Centre and South Courts, where this is deemed feasible by the developer. New plain tiles to be used are of a similar colour, texture and size to any 15 salvaged plain clay tiles. Once a materials palette has been finalised in correspondence with the local planning authority, the development shall be fully built out using those materials and in full accordance with the 1:20 detailed drawings hereby approved, employing an identical brick bonding (repeating pattern of five courses stretcher bond and single course of header bond) and mortar jointing to the retained Centre Court clocktower building. Curved plain clay tiles shall be used where gablet roofs abut the main roof elements and bonnet plain tiles shall be used at roof hip junctions. The clock within the clocktower shall be renovated and put back into working order and thereafter maintained in working order.
Reason: To secure a satisfactory form of development and to achieve a good standard of workmanship and detail, having regard to the character and locally listed status of the buildings to be demolished, which are classified as non-designated heritage assets under Planning Policy Statement 5.
06. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Existing boundary enclosures
All existing dwarf wall and iron railings/gates means of enclosure shall be retained in situ to the Clifton Road and Regents Park Road frontages.
Reason: To secure a satisfactory form of development and to achieve a good standard of workmanship and detail, having regard to the character and locally listed status of the buildings to be demolished, which are classified as non-designated heritage assets under Planning Policy Statement 5.
07. PRE-COMMENCEMENT/PRE-OCCUPATION/PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Boundary enclosures
Before the development commences, details of all new boundary treatments to Oakley Road, including the vehicular entrance and entrance to the 16 car parking spaces serving the active elderly flats, that part of Clifton Road in front of the existing West Court and any boundary proposed to separate 135 Regents Park Road from the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The decorative iron gates to Oakley Road shall be re-used as part of the boundary treatment within that part of the boundary treatment for Clifton Road. Once agreed, those boundary treatments shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of any part of the development, unless any other timing or phasing is agreed in correspondence with the local planning authority. Once constructed, those means of enclosure shall be maintained and retained in situ at all times thereafter.
Reason: To secure a satisfactory form of development.
08. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Tree protection
All operations in connection with the development hereby permitted shall comply in full with the method statement included in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Tree Survey report by Sapling Arboriculture Ltd (Rev.A) dated the 9 th August 2010.
Reason
16 To ensure that provision for trees to be retained and adequately protected throughout the construction period has been made.
17
09. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Tree pruning: timing
No vegetation clearance, including pruning of trees, shall take place between 1 March and 31 August unless a method statement has been agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and works implemented in accordance with the agreed details.
Reason: For the safeguarding of nesting birds which are protected by The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).
10. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Implementation of submitted hard and soft landscape design
The landscaping scheme shown on the Linda Oak drawing number 889/02 Rev B shall be carried out within twelve months of any of the buildings being ready for occupation. The approved landscaping shall be maintained in accordance with a maintenance schedule to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any planting takes place. Any trees, shrubs, seeded or turfed areas which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting die, fail to establish, are removed or become damaged or diseased, shall be replaced by the Developer in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.
Reason: To ensure a satisfactory form of development.
11. APPROVAL CONDITION - Construction Environment Management Plan (Pre- Commencement Condition)
Prior to the commencement of any development a written construction environment management plan shall be submitted to and approved by the LPA. The plan shall contain method statements and site specific plans to prevent or minimise impacts from noise, vibration, dust and odour for all operations, as well as proposals to monitor these measures at the site boundary to ensure emissions are minimised beyond the site boundary. During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway. No construction or building work shall be carried out on the site unless and until there is available within the site, in accordance with details to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, provision for the temporary parking of vehicles and the loading and unloading of vehicles associated with the building and other operations on the site throughout the period of work required to implement the development hereby permitted. All specified measures shall be available and implemented during any processes for which those measures are required. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby properties.
12. APPROVAL CONDITION - Bonfires [Performance Condition] No bonfires are to be allowed on site during the period of demolition, clearance and construction.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby properties. 18
13. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
14. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Delivery of plant/construction materials
No deliveries of construction materials or equipment or removal of demolition materials shall take place between the following times Mondays to Fridays - 08.30 to 09.15 hours and 14.30 to 15.30 hours.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
15. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Noise mitigation
The measures set out in paragraphs 5.7 and 5.8 (i) of the Ian Sharland report dated 4 August 2010, in respect of a glazing specification for all habitable rooms and the use of acoustic trickle vents within window frameworks, shall be fully implemented throughout the development hereby approved, unless any alternative provision is first agreed in correspondence with the local planning authority before it is installed. Once fitted, those acoustic attenuation measures shall be retained at all times thereafter.
Reason: In order to maintain satisfactory living conditions within habitable rooms, having regard to traffic noise and the proximity of operations within an adjacent Mot car repairs/serving garage and also to minimise the visual impact of vents to the exterior appearance of the new building.
16. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION – Replacement electricity substation
Notwithstanding Part 17 to Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended), no new electricity sub-station shall be provided/built at the site until the further granting of planning permission by the local planning authority. In particular, the new sub-station shall be acoustically treated by an enclosure and screened from views via the new cul-de-sac to be formed from Oakley Road.
Reason: To secure a satisfactory form of development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to ensure the amenities of new residents close to the new sub-station are safeguarded.
19 17. APPROVAL CONDITION - Code for Sustainable Homes [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code For Sustainable Homes certification body.
Reason: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Sustainable Drainage Systems (Pre-Occupation Condition)
Prior to the commencement of development a feasibility study demonstrating an assessment of the potential for the creation of a sustainable drainage system on site shall be carried out and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any measures shown to be feasible shall be verified in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented prior to first occupation of the development hereby granted consent. If the study demonstrates the site has the capacity for the implementation of a sustainable drainage system, a specification shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. A sustainable drainage system to the approved specification must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. In the development hereby granted consent, peak run-off rates and annual volumes of run-off shall be no greater than the previous conditions for the site.
Reason: To conserve valuable water resources, in compliance with and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010) and to prevent an increase in surface run-off and reduce flood risk.
19. APPROVAL CONDITION - Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables (Pre- Commencement Condition)
An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site, that will achieve a reduction in CO2 emissions [as required in core strategy policy CS20] must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO2 emissions of the development [as required in core strategy policy CS20] must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter.
Reason: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010). 20
20. APPROVAL CONDITION - Road Construction [Pre-Commencement Condition]
No development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the Local Planning Authority have approved in writing:-
- A specification of the type of construction proposed for the roads and footpaths including all relevant horizontal cross-sections and longitudinal sections showing existing and proposed levels together with details of street lighting, signing, white lining and the method of disposing of surface water. These shall include details of the junction between the proposed service road and Oakley Road, where a ‘rumble strip’ has been indicated on the submitted site layout plan
- A programme for the making up of the roads and footpaths to a standard suitable for adoption by the Highway Authority. Reason: To ensure that the roads and footpaths are constructed in accordance with standards required by the Highway Authority.
21. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Sight lines
The lines of sight set out in Appendix B to the submitted Transport Statement: Report 033.00001/TS/2, dated August 2010 shall be provided and maintained before any part of the development is first occupied. Notwithstanding Part 2 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended), no means of enclosure to the back edge of the pavement in Oakley Road shall be erected greater than 0.6m in height, measured from pavement level. Any planting within the sight lines shall not exceed 600mm in height when fully mature. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
22. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Vehicular crossings
Before the development is first brought into use, the developer shall stop up all redundant existing vehicular access points and otherwise adjust the access point in Oakley Road in accordance with the approved site layout plan. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
23. PRE-OCCUPATION/PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Details of external lighting
Before any dwelling hereby approved is first occupied the developer shall submit details of external lighting to for the completed project, particularly to the common car parking areas, for approval by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The scheme shall specify that lighting is of flat glass, full cut-off design with horizontal mountings and shall be so designed and sited as to not cause undue glare and light spillage above the horizontal onto neighbouring land/the night sky. No subsequent alterations to the approved lighting scheme are to take place unless such details are submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once approved, that scheme of works shall be fully implemented before any new or altered dwelling is first occupied. Once that scheme of works is implemented, that lighting shall be retained on site at all times thereafter in good working order in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: In the interests of crime prevention and highway safety. 21
24. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION – Drainage
Before the development commences the developer shall submit details of foul and surface water drainage to serve the development to the local planning authority for its approval in writing, including any measures and proof of approvals obtained from Southern Water to:-
(a) safeguard the public sewer currently crossing the site during construction; and, (b) divert the public sewer, ensuring that no loss of hydraulic capacity results.
Once approved, those works shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved details, before any new or altered dwelling is first occupied. Reason: To ensure the site is properly serviced and to prevent flooding off-site.
25. APPROVAL CONDITION – Car/Cycle parking [Pre-Commencement Condition]
A maximum of 35 car parking and a minimum of 21 cycle storage facilities - to include 2 No. disabled parking spaces within the 16 to serve the active elderly flats - to conform to the Local Planning Authorities standards shall be provided within the site before the development hereby permitted commences and such parking and storage shall be permanently maintained for that purpose. In particular, individual sheds, like that shown for plots 11-13 shall be placed in the gardens of the other general needs housing hereby approved for the express purpose of storing at least one bicycle. Reason: To prevent obstruction to traffic in neighbouring roads and to encourage cycling as an alternative form of transport.
26. PERFORMANCE/PRE-OCCUPATION CONDITION - Refuse Storage to active elderly flats The bin store for the active elderly flats shall be constructed of brick under a suitable weatherproof roof, with adequate ventilation. The collection doors are to be of sturdy construction and hinged to open outwards with a minimum opening of 1.4m wide, and any lock system to comply with SCC standard lock requirements. Internal lighting shall be provided to operate when doors are open, and a tap and wash down gulley shall be provided, with suitable falls to the floor. The access path to the bin store shall be constructed to footpath standards and to be a minimum width of 1.5m. Any gates on the pathway are not to be lockable, unless they comply with SCC standard lock detail. The gradient of the access path to the bin store shall not exceed 1:12 unless suitable anti-slip surfacing is used, and still shall not exceed 1:10. A single dropped kerb to the adjacent highway will be required to access the refuse vehicle with the Euro bin. The refuse store and refuse facilities, detailed in the submitted waste management plan shall be fully provided before any of the active elderly flats hereby approved are first occupied. Once provided, those refuse facilities shall be maintained at all times thereafter.
27. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION – Refuse provision
Before the development commences, details of how refuse is to be stored and recycled for plots numbered 1-15 and where it will be placed on refuse collection day shall be submitted to the local planning authority for its approval. Once approved, those facilities shall be provided before the first occupation of each of those respective dwellings and retained at all times thereafter. Reason: In the interests of amenity 22
28. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Amenity space provision
Before any dwelling is first occupied, the amenity space associated with each dwelling or group of dwellings shall be made available for use by all occupants of the flats and thereafter be maintained for that purpose at all times.
Reason: To provide reasonable and private living conditions.
29. PRE-OCCUPATION CONDITION - Ecological mitigation
Prior to any demolition work commencing 10 temporary ‘Bat tubes’ as set out in the ecological mitigation measures set out at paragraph 7.1.9 of the Michael Woods Associates report 1973_R2 dated October shall be provided on site. Once the development is complete, those ‘bat tubes’ shall be repositioned throughout the development within 2 months of the first occupation of any active elderly flat, in accordance with positioning details to be submitted to and agreed by the local planning authority in writing. Demolition of 5-8 South Court shall only take place between 1 st November and 28 February in any year that this consent remains extant.
Reason: In the interests of promoting biodiversity on the site and to mitigate for the loss of a Bat roost identified in the roof void to 5-8 South Court, in connection with safeguarding species protected by The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.
30. APPROVAL CONDITION- Unsuspected Contamination [Performance Condition]
The site shall be monitored for evidence of unsuspected contamination throughout construction. If potential contamination is encountered that has not previously been identified no further development shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall not recommence until an assessment of the risks presented by the contamination has been undertaken and the details of the findings and any remedial actions has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Any changes to the agreed remediation actions will require the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure any land contamination not previously identified is assessed and remediated so as not to present any significant risks to human health or, the wider environment.
31. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Use clean fill materials
Clean uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to occupancy of the site.
Reason: To ensure no ground contamination risks to human health and the environment are introduced onto the development. 23
32. PRE-OCCUPATION/PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Prevention of over/interlooking
The two vision obscuring louvres detailed on drawings prefixed 696 PD and numbered 07 Rev B and 16, shall be fully installed before the top flat in plots 11-13 is first occupied. Once fitted, those louvres shall be maintained in place, so as to prevent any over/interlooking of adjacent properties at 135 and 137 Regents Park Road
Reason: To protect the privacy of occupiers of occupiers of adjoining properties.
Notes to Applicant
1. The Developer is reminded that the site is covered by the Southampton (Regents Park) Tree Preservation Order 1965 and that any other works to protected trees not authorised by this consent identified in the report by Sapling Arboriculture Ltd (Rev.A) dated the 9 th August 2010, will require the separate consent of the Local Planning Authority.
2. This application has been inspected by Southern Water’s agents. Their comments dated 8.9.2010 are attached for the developer’s information/action.
3. The developer will require a road opening permit to adjust, stop up or otherwise alter dropped kerbing and vehicle cross-overs in the public highway. Please contact the Council’s Partner to make the necessary arrangements on (023) 8038 8048.
24 Application 10/01090/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS4 Housing delivery CS5 Housing density CS13 Fundamentals of design CS14 Historic environment CS15 Affordable housing CS16 Housing mix and type CS18 Transport: Reduce-manage-invest CS19 Car & cycle parking CS20 Tackling and adapting to climate change CS22 Promoting biodiversity and protecting habitats CS23 Flood risk CS25 The delivery of infrastructure and developer contributions
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of development SDP4 Development access SDP5 Parking SDP6 Urban design principles SDP7 Urban design context SDP8 Urban form and public space SDP9 Scale, massing & appearance SDP10 Safety & security SDP11 Accessibility & movement SDP12 Landscape & biodiversity SDP13 Resource conservation SDP14 Renewable energy SDP16 Noise SDP17 Lighting SDP21 Water quality and drainage SDP22 Contaminated land NE4 Protected species HE4 Local list CLT5 Open space in new residential developments CLT6 Provision of children’s play areas H1 Housing targets H2 Previously developed land H3 Specialist housing need H7 The residential environment
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
25 Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing (2010) PPS5 Planning for the historic environment (2010) PPG13 Transport (2001) PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport & Recreation (2002) PPS23 Planning & Pollution Control (2004) PPS22 Renewable energy (2004) PPG24 Planning & Noise (2004)
Core Strategy Policy CS14 The Council will safeguard from inappropriate development and, where appropriate, enhance important historical assets and their settings and the character of areas of acknowledged importance including listed buildings, conservation areas, sites of archaeological importance and their setting and parks and gardens of special historic interest. The Council will promote the retention of buildings and structures of local architectural or historical importance identified on the Local List .
Policy HE4, Adopted Local Plan, (Saved Policies). Development will be resisted on sites which will involve the demolition or alteration of buildings and structures on the local list. The criteria to be considered in determining a planning application are:
(i) The original design qualities and architectural value of the building to the local area ; (ii) The manner in which the structure or building is illustrative of the local history of the area; (iii) The way in which the structure or building characterises the local community values; (iv) The manner in which the building or structure contributes positively to an area through its landmark quality , particularly on an important route within the city, and its contribution to an historic vista or landscape. Additionally, the application has been considered in relation to the recently issues Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 5, Planning for the Historic Environment.
Relevant policies from PPS5 are set out below:
HE7.2 In considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset , local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the significance of the heritage asset and the value that it holds for this and future generations . This understanding should be used by the local planning authority to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposals.
HE7.3 If the evidence suggests that the heritage asset may have a special significance to a particular community that may not be fully understood from the usual process of consultation and assessment, then the local planning authority should take reasonable steps to seek the views of that community .
HE7.4 Local planning authorities should take into account: – the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets, and of utilising their positive role in place-shaping; and the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets and the historic environment generally can make to the establishment and maintenance of sustainable communities and economic vitality by virtue of the factors set out in HE3.1 26
HE7.5 Local planning authorities should take into account the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment. The consideration of design should include scale, height, massing, alignment, materials and use .
HE7.7 Where loss of significance is justified on the merits of new development, local planning authorities should not permit the new development without taking all reasonable steps to ensure the new development will proceed after the loss has occurred by imposing appropriate planning conditions or securing obligations by agreement .
HE12.3 Where the loss of the whole or a material part of a heritage asset’s significance is justified, local planning authorities should require the developer to record and advance understanding of the significance of the heritage asset before it is lost, using planning conditions or obligations as appropriate. The extent of the requirement should be proportionate to the nature and level of the asset’s significance. Developers should publish this evidence and deposit copies of the reports with the relevant historic environment record. Local planning authorities should require any archive generated to be deposited with a local museum or other public depository willing to receive it. Local planning authorities should impose planning conditions or obligations to ensure such work is carried out in a timely manner and that the completion of the exercise is properly secured.
27
APPENDIX 2 10/01090/FUL – Thorners Homes Regents Park Road/Clifton Road/Oakley Road
We are in receipt of Frank Pope's email of yesterday which I know reflects the opinion of those AP members who have been directly involved in appraising this proposal. Frank's point re details is well made and Conditions on materials and details would go some way to controlling the quality. The AP concern however is more fundamental than detail; we believe it relates more to the principle of demolishing what is a building that by rights should be Listed and not replacing it with a building of equivalent quality.
We understand that the council must weigh up all aspects of the application including social and, where necessary, related economic considerations. Whilst we appreciate that the AP offers a service to you the council and that in that sense you are our client, we have a duty to state our position on matters of architectural principle, particularly when they have historic and cultural implications. In this case Frank has pointed out the pre-eminence of Sir Aston Webb. It has also been noted that Webb died prior to completion of the drawings and that his son completed them, however this need not undermine the buildings' importance; the concepts of massing, layout and indeed detail may well have been established at the outset - a feat not difficult for an architect of his stature and experience. The practice had a well established style and at that time could call upon an industry to execute the design that was still craft-based.
It is felt by the AP that the loss of these buildings is not just architectural but also has cultural implications for the city. It feels wrong to rid ourselves of a whole site that is a unique and rare piece of crafted heritage. It lends a scale, design and exemplary level of detail that can be used as a reference point for all future generations to admire and to emulate. This is commonplace to more historic towns and cities and is why so much new architecture in such places is invariably of high quality. It is our view that converting and sensitively extending the building would produce an architecture that kept the original and delicately enhanced it with a contemporary solution. It is impossible for us to give firm views on how this approach would compare financially with the application, but the demolition of buildings that are in good condition, albeit requiring some modernization (services and insulation) is rarely without merit; in this case it seems absolutely appropriate.
It has been said that the building cannot be nationally Listed as its windows have been changed to UPVC. This seems to us to be misguided. The windows are capable of being reinstated and there would be no loss to the fabric of the building in so doing. Its qualities lie in the overall composition of the buildings (and railings as means of enclosure etc) and in the craftsmanship displayed in the choice and handling of brickwork, roofing, rainwater goods and other details. The use of 2” (two inch) thick bricks is so rare as to be worthy of consideration for listing – and their condition is as good as the day they were laid.
I note that the applicants have received comments from your conservation team and that these are largely confined to relatively minor changes to central roof lines and a preference for window surrounds being in brick rather than recon "stone". On this basis the agent is currently preparing 1:20 details of the scheme. It is understood that these will be available prior to the Planning Panel of 26 October. It is noted that the next meeting of the AP is 20 October, a week from today. I expect to attend along with designated and interested colleagues and would appreciate this application being aired again. Clearly if the details were available at that time they would be of interest, although this is not to undermine our concerns about the overall design.
I understand from Sarah Brown at SE Panel with whom I spoke yesterday that their members have been asked to make comments this week (they must operate differently to us) and plan to compose and issue the minutes this Friday 15 October. I also note your advice to me that the verbal synopsis you have had indicates that the SE Panel were inclined not to comment on the proposals, preferring to see the existing building retained. We await with interest the formalising of their views. (For those of us who were unaware of their background I note that the SE Panel is an independent design panel, currently funded by CABE and the HCA, but with no affiliation to either, nor to the RIBA. It began life as part of SEEDA, and its future may be subject to current government funding uncertainties. I have no doubt that its members have proven design ability).
It is possible that the AP may wish to elect a member to speak to the Planning Panel on 26 October; we will advise on this prior to the meeting. regards Julian Boswell Chair; Southampton City Council Architects’ Panel 28
29 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 10
Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26 October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address: 24-32 Canute Road and 157-159 Albert Road South, Southampton
Proposed development: Redevelopment of the site with a 6-storey building fronting Canute Road and a 7-storey building fronting Albert Road South to provide 53 flats (37 x one-bedroom and 16 x two- bedroom) and four Class A1/A3 commercial units with associated parking (Outline application seeking approval for layout, access and scale).
Application 09/00966/OUT Application type Outline number Case officer Richard Plume Public speaking 15 minutes time Last date for 11.12.2009 Ward Bargate determination: Reason for Panel Proposal is for a major Ward Councillors Cllr Bogle referral development requiring Cllr Damani completion of a Cllr Willacy Section 106 agreement
Applicant : Kings Oak Partnership Agent: None
Recommendation De legate to Planning and Development Manager to grant Summary planning permission subject to criteria listed in report
Reason for Granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The Council has also taken into account the findings of the specialist reports submitted with the application particularly that relating to flood risk. Subject to the incorporation of a Flood Management Plan into the Section 106 agreement, the Council is satisfied that the proposed development would be safe in accordance with the guidance in PPS25. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, planning permission should therefore be granted.
Policies SDP1, SDP2, SDP3, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP13, H1, H2, H7, H9, H12. City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006). Policies CS1, CS4, CS5, CS13, CS15, CS16, CS19, CS20, CS23, CS25 Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010).
Appendix attached
1 Development Plan Policies 2 Panel report of 24 November 2009 3 Panel minutes 24.11.2009
1
Recommendation in Full
Delegate to the Planning and Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement to secure: i. Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended). ii. A financial contribution towards strategic transport improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG/D. iii. Financial contributions towards the relevant elements of public open space required by the development in line with Polices CLT5, CLT6 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policy CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended). iv. Provision of affordable housing in accordance with Policy H9 of the Local Plan. v. Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer. vi. A financial contribution towards public realm improvements in accordance with policy. vii. Training and Employment Management Plan. viii. Submission and implementation of a Travel Plan. ix. Resource Conservation Measures in accordance with Local Plan/Core Strategy Policies. x. Flood Management Plan.
In the event that the legal agreement is not completed within 3 months of the Panel date the Planning and Development Manager be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.
1. Background
1.1 This application was delegated to officers to approve subject to a Section 106 agreement and conditions at the Panel meeting on 24 November 2009. The Section 106 agreement has not been entered into and the proposed development has now been amended. This report seeks the Panel’s approval of the changes to the scheme. The previous report is included as Appendix 2 to this report.
2
2. Changes to the Proposal
2.1 The main change to the development is in connection with flood risk. As originally submitted, the application site incorporated a significant area of the public highway in Albert Road South. It was proposed to close the road to through traffic and raise the road level to facilitate an escape route to higher ground at the approach to the Itchen Bridge. This area of public highway is no longer included within the application site and no road closure or land raising is now proposed. In all other respects the proposal is identical to that considered previously.
2.2 The amended application is accompanied by a Supplementary Flood Risk Assessment/Mitigation Report and a Flood Management Report.
3. Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
3.2 The most relevant policy consideration to the amended application is that covering flood risk – Policy CS 23 in the Core Strategy and government guidance in PPS 25 (Development and Flood Risk).
4. Further Consultation Responses
4.1 Following the receipt of the amendments to the application a further consultation exercise has been undertaken. No additional comments have been received from neighbouring occupiers.
4.2 Environment Agency – have no objection to the amended proposal but make a number of suggestions to be taken into consideration. The development does not provide safe access and egress for the lifetime of the development. The applicant proposes to address this by the submitted Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan. The proposal provides a high standard of flood risk management with respect to the risk faced by the property/building. The concern relates to the risks faced by the development’s users when accessing the development during times of flood.
4.3 The amended Flood Risk Assessment reflects the findings of the Council’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (August 2010) and the Environment Agency’s Tidal Itchen Flood Hazard Mapping Study. These studies confirm there is no current risk to access and egress from the site during the present day design event. Allowing for climate change, safe access and egress during the design event will still be available up to the year 2070 when flood waters along the route are not projected to exceed the tolerable allowance of 250mm in depth. Beyond 2070 however, with no subsequent flood defence works undertaken, the risk to life resulting from the design tide is projected to notably increase with flood waters over the route reaching depths in excess of 1.1 metres by 2115. Such depths are considered to be a ‘danger for most – including the general public’.
3
4.4 Due to the lack of safe access and egress in design flood conditions, the revised FRA includes a Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan (FWEP) to mitigate against the residual risk of flooding. The Environment Agency recommend that the Council consults the emergency planners and the emergency services on the FWEP so that they are confident it can be relied upon to manage risk. Agreement and securing a suitable FWEP is crucial to the safety of the development. The Environment Agency’s involvement during an emergency will be limited to issuing flood warnings to occupiers and responders. It is not within the Agency’s remit to approve the adequacy of flood warning and evacuation procedures.
4.5 The conclusion of the Environment Agency’s advice is that it is for the Council to determine whether the proposed access route can be considered safe, taking account of all the relevant considerations. If the Council are not satisfied that the FWEP adequately addresses the identified flood hazard, planning permission should be refused.
4.6 Emergency Planning Officer - A Flood Risk Management Plan Guidance Template has been prepared for use in the City based on best practice used elsewhere. This guidance is currently out for consultation. If the Panel decide to approve the development it should be a requirement that a Flood Risk Management Plan be submitted and filed through the Emergency Planning Unit prior to occupation of the building.
5 Planning Consideration Key Issues 5.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: the principle of this development including the suitability of the site for a mixed use development; design issues, including the impact on the character of the area; flood risk and mitigation measures and transportation matters. As already explained in this report, the only change made to the application relates to the removal of flood risk mitigation measures involving works in the adjoining public highway in Albert Road South which were previously proposed. In terms of the content of the application and the proposed buildings, these are unchanged and were considered by the Panel in November of last year. There has been no significant change in policy since that time, despite the adoption of the Core Strategy, and therefore members are directed to the change in circumstances relating to flood risk as the main consideration in relation to this amended application.
Flood Risk Issues 5.2. Since this application was considered last year the Core Strategy has been adopted and the Stage 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment has been produced to ensure that future developments in Southampton respond to predicted sea level rise by mitigating development in flood risk areas. From a strategic viewpoint the Council has identified three outline options for managing flood risk in the City. Option 1 is a strategic coastal defence on or near the shoreline to protect the whole of the City Centre. Option 2 proposes site specific measures as new developments come forward to protect these sites over the next 100 years. Option 3 is a combination of site specific measures (at a lower standard) to provide protection for the next 45-60 years and a contribution towards future strategic coastal defences. This final option, known as the ‘managed adaptive approach’, is the Council’s preferred strategic approach at this stage. Under this approach, the developer will need to ensure that on site flood defence measures are integrated into the scheme design. Part of the managed adaptive approach could include developer contributions to future coastal defences as part of a strategic infrastructure levy. The Council has
4 commissioned an Infrastructure Study to look at these options but no decision has yet been taken on implementing such a policy and therefore this cannot form part of the decision on this application.
5.3 Recent planning applications for new residential developments in Flood Zones 2 and 3 within the City have encountered problems associated with achieving a safe means of access and egress to and from the site over the anticipated lifetime of the development (100 years for new housing schemes). In some cases this has resulted in objections being raised by the Environment Agency including the case of American Wharf where the application was ‘called-in’ by the government for decision. For the current submission, the Environment Agency were previously minded to accept the proposal only on the understanding that a safe means of access could be secured by raising the adjoining highway to 3.95 metres Above Ordnance Datum level. The agency have now reviewed their approach and members attention is drawn to their detailed comments in paragraphs 4.2 to 4.5 of this report. The responsibility for deciding if the development is safe now rests with the Council in their planning and emergency service roles.
5.4 In assessing the safety of this proposed development it should be noted that the development is predicted to be safe until the year 2070 as it is situated within Flood Zone 2 rather than the higher risk Flood Zones 3 and 3A. The revised Flood Risk Assessment and Flood Management Plan submitted by the applicant therefore address the residual risk period beyond 2070 for the predicted lifetime of the development up to 2115. The applicant’s case is that by 2070 a Coastal Defence Strategy will be in place and therefore additional measures will not be necessary. Although this may prove to be the case it cannot be guaranteed and the documents submitted do provide management measures for evacuation of the site and/or provision of a safe haven given the relatively short tidal flood event period. Similar mitigation measures were proposed as part of the American Wharf development but these were given limited weight by the Inspector and subsequently by the Secretary of State. The severity of flooding and the predicted design event is not comparable in this case and the level of flood risk is much less. Incorporation of a Flood Management Plan into the Section 106 agreement will provide a measure of future control to mitigate the dangers to future occupiers. In these circumstances it is considered that the proposed development is safe and that planning permission can be granted without the need for the highways works previously proposed.
6. Summary
6.1 New developments in flood risk zones involve balancing the potential future risk to property and people against other material considerations which in this case include new housing and associated regeneration benefits. The previous approach taken by the Environment Agency would have restricted the development potential of this and adjoining sites. A more pragmatic approach is now being suggested which, subject to certain safeguards, allow this development to proceed.
7 Conclusion
7.1 The amended planning application is recommended for conditional approval subject to a Section 106 agreement.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers 1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 2(a), 2(b), 4(am), 6(a), 6(c), 7(a), 7(c), 7(k), 7(w), 9(a). RP for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
5
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Outline Permission Timing Condition Outline Planning Permission for the principle of the development proposed and the following matters sought for consideration, namely the layout of buildings and other external ancillary areas, the means of access (vehicular and pedestrian) into the site and the buildings, the scale, massing and bulk of the structure, is approved subject to the following: (i) Written approval of the details of the following awaited reserved matters shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority prior to any works taking place on the site the appearance and architectural design specifying the external materials to be used, and the landscaping of the site specifying both the hard, soft treatments and means of enclosures. (ii) An application for the approval of the outstanding reserved matters shall be made in writing to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this Outline Permission (iii) The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this Outline permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last application of the reserved matters to be approved whichever is the latter. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 91 and Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Amenity Space Access [Pre-Occupation Condition] The external amenity space serving the development hereby approved, and pedestrian access to it, shall be made available as a communal area prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be retained with access to it at all times for the use of the flat units. REASON: To ensure the provision of adequate amenity space in association with the approved flats.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION – Land/Groundwater Contamination (Pre-Commencement Condition) Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:
1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: all previous uses § potential contaminants associated with those uses § a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors § potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.
2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.
3. The site investigation results and the detailed risk assessment (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
6
4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (3) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.
Any changes to these components require the express consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To protect the minor aquifer beneath the site and the surface waters in the vicinity. The site may be contaminated due to previous activities that have taken place on site. Risk to groundwater and surface water has not yet been fully established at the site.
04. APPROVAL CONDITION – Unsuspected Contamination (Performance Condition) If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. Reason: To protect controlled waters from contamination. Due to the historic uses of the site, there may be areas of contamination on site that are not identified and characterised during intrusive site investigations.
05. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use of uncontaminated soils and fill [Pre-Commencement Condition] Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site. Reason: To ensure imported materials are suitable and do not introduce any land contamination risks onto the development.
06. APPROVAL CONDITION - Archaeological investigation [Pre-Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is initiated at an appropriate point in development procedure.
07. APPROVAL CONDITION - Archaeological work programme [Performance Condition]
The developer will secure the completion of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is completed.
7
08. APPROVAL CONDITION - Bird Hazard Management Plan (Pre-Commencement Condition) Development shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted plan shall include details of management of any flat/shallow pitched/green roofs on the buildings within the site which may be attractive to nesting, roosting and "loafing" birds (possible different management strategies during the breeding season and outside the breeding season). The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved upon the completion of the development and shall remain in force for the life of the building. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON It is necessary to manage the roofs of the development in order to minimise its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Southampton Airport.
For information: The Bird Hazard Management Plan must ensure that flat/shallow pitched roofs be constructed to allow access to all areas by foot using permanent fixed access stairs, ladders or similar. The owner/occupier must not allow gulls, to nest, roost or loaf on the building. Checks must be made weekly or sooner if bird activity dictates, during the breeding season. Outside of the breeding season, gull activity must be monitored and the roof checked regularly to ensure that gulls do not utilise the roof. Any gulls found nesting, roosting or loafing must be dispersed by the owner/occupier when detected or when requested by BAA Airfield Operations Staff. In some instances, it may be necessary to contact BAA Airfield Operations staff before bird dispersal takes place. The owner/occupier must remove any nests or eggs found on the roof.
The breeding season for gulls typically runs from March to June. The owner/occupier must obtain the appropriate licences from Natural England before the removal of nests and eggs.
09. APPROVAL CONDITION - No Pile Driving for Foundations [Performance Condition]
No percussion or impact driven pilling activities shall take place for pre-works, foundations, or as any part of the development. Reason: In the interests of securing the stability of the site and adjacent land in order to protect the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties.
10. APPROVAL CONDITION - Refuse & Recycling [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Before the works commence details (and amended plans) of facilities to be provided for the storage, removal and recycling of refuse from the premises shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing. Such facilities as approved shall provide for a level approach and be permanently maintained and retained for that purpose. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, the amenities of future occupiers of the development and the occupiers of nearby properties and in the interests of highway safety.
8
11. APPROVAL CONDITION - Noise - plant and machinery [Pre-Commencement Condition] The use hereby approved shall not commence until an acoustic report and written scheme to minimise noise from plant and machinery associated with the proposed development, including details of location, orientation and acoustic enclosure, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby properties.
12. APPROVAL CONDITION - Extract Ventilation - control of noise, fumes and odour [Pre- Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place until a written scheme for the control of noise, fumes and odours from extractor fans and other equipment have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and findings. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby properties.
13. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
14. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
15. APPROVAL CONDITION - Car Parking Allocation (Pre-Occupation Condition)
No part of the development shall be occupied until a car parking allocation scheme, to show how car parking spaces will be allocated to the various uses and occupiers, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The car parking spaces shall be allocated and provided in accordance with the approved scheme and thereafter shall be retained for use in connection with the approved development and for no other purpose.
9
REASON To ensure that the car parking is provided in accordance with Council policies.
16. APPROVAL CONDITION - Layout of Car Parking/Servicing (Pre-Occupation Condition)
The whole of the car parking, cycle storage and servicing facilities shown on the approved plans shall be laid out and made available before the use of the building to which these facilities relate commences and thereafter retained solely for the use of the occupants and visitors to the site and for no other purpose. REASON To ensure adequate on-site parking and servicing facilities and to avoid congestion in the adjoining highway.
17. APPROVAL CONDITION - Bicycle Stands (Pre-Occupation Condition)
The building shall not be occupied in full or in part until cycle stands have been made available for visitors to the site in accordance with plans to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved cycle stands shall thereafter be retained on site for that purpose. REASON To encourage cycling as a sustainable form of transport.
18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Construction Method Statement (Pre-Commencement Condition)
The development hereby approved shall not commence until a method statement and appropriate drawings of the means of construction of the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The method statement shall specify vehicular access arrangements, the areas to be used for contractor's vehicle parking and plant, storage of building materials and any excavated material, temporary buildings and all working areas required for the construction of the development hereby permitted. The building works shall proceed in accordance with the approved method statement unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON To protect the amenities of neighbours and the wider environment
19. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of Use (Performance Condition)
Those parts of the development to be used for purposes within Class A3 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any order replacing or amending this Order) shall not be open for public use outside the hours of 0730 to 2330. REASON To protect the amenities of residents within the site and occupiers of adjoining residential properties.
20. APPROVAL CONDITION - Security Details (Pre-Occupation Condition)
Details of security arrangements for the residential development hereby approved including access to communal entrances and the car parking areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be
10 implemented before first occupation of the residential accommodation and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON In the interests of safety and security.
21. APPROVAL CONDITION - Surface Water Drainage (Pre-Commencement Condition)
No development shall commence until details of the proposed means of surface water disposal have been submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water. The development shall be carried out in accordance with these approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied that the development would not increase the risk of flooding in the area.
22. APPROVAL CONDITION - Sustainable Design Measures (Pre-Commencement Condition)
No development shall take place until the applicant has provided to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing a report assessing the feasibility of incorporating the following sustainable design measures into the development:
Energy minimisation and renewable energy or low carbon technologies; Water efficiency measures Urban Drainage Systems; Waste Management and recycling; Sustainable construction materials; Rainwater harvesting.
The report shall include an action plan detailing how these measures will be integrated into the development. The approved scheme shall then be provided in accordance with these details prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent. REASON To ensure the development minimises overall demand for resources and is compliant with the City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006) policies SDP13 and SDP6 and Core Strategy Policy CS20.
23. APPROVAL CONDITION - Code for Sustainable Homes [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve a minimum level 3 standard in the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code for Sustainable Homes certification body. Reason: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with Policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (January 2010).
11
24 APPROVAL CONDITION – Contamination Verification Report (Pre-Development Condition)
Prior to commencement of development, a verification report demonstrating completion of the works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority.
The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan a “long-term monitoring and maintenance plan”) for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan, and for the reporting of this to the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that any remediation is satisfactorily completed, if deemed necessary.
27 APPROVAL CONDITION – Piling (Performance Condition)
Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater. Reason: To protect controlled waters from contamination by preventing the creation of potential contaminant pathways.
28 APPROVAL CONDITION – Flood Risk Mitigation (Performance Condition)
The development must fully comply with the mitigation strategy detailed within the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), FRMS07123-4, 17th August 2009 and drawing 2009/SOU/03 Revision P4, before any of the development can be occupied. Reason: To ensure that a site can be developed safely the FRA is proposing mitigation measures that ensure that flood risk to the development is managed. It is essential that this mitigation is completed before any of the site is occupied …….CHECK
NOTE TO APPLICANT A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development. To initiate a sewer capacity check to identify the appropriate connection point for the development please contact Atkins Ltd, Anglo St James House, 39A Southgate Street, Winchester, SO23 9EH (tel: 01962 858688) or www.southernwater.co.uk)
12
Application 09/00966/OUT APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS1 City Centre Approach CS4 Housing Delivery CS5 Housing Density CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS15 Affordable Housing CS16 Housing Mix and Type CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change CS23 Flood Risk CS25 The Delivery of Infrastructure and Developer Contributions
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP12 Landscape & Biodiversity SDP13 Resource Conservation SDP16 Noise SDP17 Lighting NE4 Protected Species H1 Housing Supply H2 Previously Developed Land H7 Residential Environment
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing (2010) PPG13 Transport (2001) PPS25 Planning & Flood Risk (2006)
13
14
Application 09/00966/OUT APPENDIXAppendix 1 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS1 City Centre Approach CS4 Housing Delivery CS5 Housing Density CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS15 Affordable Housing CS16 Housing Mix and Type CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change CS23 Flood Risk CS25 The Delivery of Infrastructure and Developer Contributions
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP12 Landscape & Biodiversity SDP13 Resource Conservation SDP16 Noise SDP17 Lighting NE4 Protected Species H1 Housing Supply H2 Previously Developed Land H7 Residential Environment
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing (2010) PPG13 Transport (2001) PPS25 Planning & Flood Risk (2006)
1 This page is intentionally left blank
APPENDIX 2 Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Appendix 2 Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 24 November 2009 Planning Application Report of the Head of Division Application address 24 -32 Canute Road , 157 -159 Albert Road South, Part of Southampton Hall of Aviation site and adjoining public highway, Southampton Proposed Redevelopment of the site with a 6 -storey building fronting development Canute Road and a 7-storey building fronting Albert Road South to provide 53 flats (37 x one-bedroom and 16 x two- bedroom) and four Class A1/A3 commercial units with associated car parking, landscaping and highway works including the closure of part of the public highway in Albert Road South (Outline application seeking approval for layout, access and scale). Applicant Kings Oak Partnership Agent None
Application number 09/0 0966 /OUT Application type Outline Case officer RP Application category Smallscale Major
Recommendation Delegate to Development Control Manager to grant planning Summary permission subject to conditions and a Section 106 Agreement
Reason for Panel Proposal is for a major development requiring completion of a legal consideration agreement under Section 106 of the 1990 Act.
Date of receipt 11.09.2009 City Ward Bargate Date of registration 11.09.2009 Cllr Bogle Publicity expiry date 16.10.2009 Ward members Cllr Damani Date to determine by 11.12.2009 Cllr Willacy
Site area 0. 369 hectares Usable amenity area 440 sq.m. Density - whole site 144 dph Landscaped areas 370 sq.m. Site coverage (developed area) 1,270 sq.m.
Residential mix numbers unit size Studio / 1-bedroom 37 42 sq.m 2-bedroom 16 80 sq.m. 3-bedroom
Accessibility zone High Parking Permit Zone Yes Car parking 18 plus on street Policy maximum: 26 provision parking Motor cycles / 56 cycle spaces Bicycles
Key submitted documents supporting application Planning Statement Transport Assessment Flood Risk Assessment Sustainability Statement Design and Access Statement Planning D rawings
Appendix attached - None
Recommendation in full
Delegate to the Development Control Manager to grant conditional planning permission subject to:
1. The Environment Agency withdrawing their objection to the application, and 2. The applicant entering into a Section 106 legal agreement to secure:
(i) Site specific highway works in the vicinity of the site to be secured through a Section 278 agreement. (ii) Provision of affordable housing in accordance with policy. (iii) A financial contribution towards public realm improvements in accordance with policy. (iv) A financial contribution towards strategic transport improvements in accordance with policy. (v) A financial contribution towards open space improvements in accordance with policy. (vi) A highway condition survey. (vii) Training and Employment Management Plan. (viii) Dedication of land to public use on the north side of Albert Road South in connection with alterations to the public highway. (ix) A requirement that the development shall not commence, save for demolition of the existing buildings and such site preparation as shall be agreed until the road closure procedure has been finalised. (x) The developer paying for the necessary Traffic Regulation Order. (xi) Submission and implementation of a Travel Plan.
Or 3. That the Development Control Manager be authorised to refuse permission if the Section 106 Agreement has not been completed at the end of the 13 week period on the grounds of failure to secure the necessary Section 106 obligations.
Background
The Council resolved to grant planning permission, subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement, in May 2008 for the redevelopment of the application site together with the adjoining land occupied by the Southampton Hall of Aviation (application reference 08/00332/OUT). This outline application proposed redevelopment of the whole site with 6 and 7-storey buildings to provide a total of 103 flats, a replacement museum and 4 commercial units. The application involved extensive alterations to the public highway including closure of part of the public highway in Albert Road South to enable a safe means of access in the event of a flood. The planning permission has not been issued as the applicant has not been able to enter into the Section 106 agreement. This revised application excludes the majority of the museum site which would be largely unaltered.
Proposed Development and Surrounding Context
The application site and surroundings
The application site has an area of 0.369 hectares and comprises land in Canute Road and Albert Road South. The existing buildings are a mix of 2-storey and 3-storey warehouse and office buildings. The application site includes a large part of the public highway in Albert Road South, it also includes an area of car parking and a small part of the Southampton Hall of Aviation Museum on the north side of Albert Road South.
The surrounding area is characterised by a mixture of architectural styles, building heights and land uses including a mix of residential and commercial. Royal Crescent Road forms the eastern boundary of the Canute Road Conservation Area which contains a number of listed buildings associated with the former railway yard and docks. The adjoining site to the south-west on Canute Road was being redeveloped to provide 88 flats and ground floor commercial units within a 5 to 7-storey building, but work on this building ceased some time ago. To the north-east on the Canute Road frontage is a 4-storey public house building, and on Albert Road South, a 4-storey residential building (Atlantic Mansions).
Details of the Proposal.
The current application is for outline permission for consideration of the amount of development proposed, the access, layout and scale. The outstanding reserved matters covering the external appearance and landscaping of the site would need to be assessed as part of a separate application should outline permission be granted.
The application proposes the redevelopment of the site following demolition of the existing buildings. The proposal is for a 6-storey building fronting Canute Road and a 7-storey building fronting Albert Road South to provide 4 commercial units (Class A1 and A3) and 53 flats (37 x one bedroom and 16 x two bedroom units) with 18 car parking spaces, cycle storage and bin storage on the ground floor. The maximum building height shown is 19 metres above ground level. A raised amenity area of some 440 square metres is provided at first floor level over the car parking area.
It is proposed to effectively ‘downgrade’ the highway status of Albert Road South over a length of approximately 120 metres. The road will be closed as a public highway to become a landscaped public area of shared vehicle and pedestrian use. The levels would be altered, particularly in the central part of the site, where the level would be raised to 3.95 metres AOD to enable a safe pedestrian route from the Canute Road properties to higher land in the event of a flood. 17 car parking spaces would be provided effectively on-street. On the north side of Albert Road South, two areas of land would become incorporated into the public highway to allow turning facilities for larger vehicles. This would involve reconfiguring the access to the car park of the adjoining museum site. A pedestrian footpath, as part of the flood escape route, would be provided across Council owned land from Albert Road South to Saltmarsh Road.
The four (Class A1/A3) commercial units would have an area of 338 square metres.
The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement, a Flood Risk Assessment and an Environmental Screening Report.
Relevant Planning Policy
National planning guidance in PPS1, PPS3, PPG13 and PPS25 is relevant to consideration of this application.
City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006)
The Hall of Aviation Museum site is allocated in the Local Plan for residential development (approximately 50 units) under Policy H1. The following general policies of the Local Plan are relevant:
SDP1 - Quality of Development SDP2 - Integrating Transport and Development SDP3 - Travel Demands
SDP4 - Development Access SDP5 - Parking SDP6/7 - Urban Design/Context SDP8 - Urban Form and Public Space SDP9 - Scale, Massing and Appearance SDP10 - Safety and Security SDP11 - Accessibility and Movement SDP13 - Resource Conservation SDP20 - Flood Risk SDP21 - Water Quality and Drainage SDP22 - Contaminated Land CLT5/6 - Open Space/Play Space H1 - Housing Supply H2 - Previously Developed Land H7 - The Residential Environment H8 - Housing Density H9 - Affordable Housing Requirements H12 - Housing Type and Design MSA1 - City Centre Design IMP1 - Provision of Infrastructure
Core Strategy
The emerging Core Strategy has recently been declared ‘sound’ by the Inspectorate and it is anticipated that the amended Core Strategy will be adopted by the Council early next year. The following policies are relevant to this planning application:
CS1 - City Centre Approach CS4 - Housing Delivery CS5 - Housing Density CS13 - Fundamentals of Design CS15 - Affordable Housing CS16 - Housing Mix and Type CS19 - Car and Cycle Parking CS23 - Flood Risk CS25 - Infrastructure
Relevant Planning History
Hall of Aviation Site
07/01943/OUT
Planning permission was refused in February 2008 for redevelopment to provide 50 flats and a replacement museum. The reasons for refusal related to the impact on mature trees, the lack of sustainability measures and failure to secure Section 106 obligations.
159 Albert Road South
05/00703/FUL
Planning permission was granted in November 2005 for redevelopment of the site to provide 5 flats in a six-storey building. This permission has not yet been implemented.
31-32 Canute Road and 157-159 Albert Road South
06/01840/OUT
Planning permission was refused in April 2007 for demolition of the existing buildings and erection of six and seven-storey buildings to provide 28 flats and a commercial unit (Use Classes A1 and A3) with associated parking and vehicular access from Albert Road South (outline application seeking approval for access, layout and scale).
07/01064/OUT
Planning permission was refused in October 2007 for demolition of the existing buildings and erection of six and seven-storey buildings to provide 27 flats and a commercial unit (Use Classes A1 and A3) with associated parking and vehicular access from Albert Road South (outline application seeking approval for access, layout and scale).
The reasons for refusal for both these applications related to failure to address flood risk and risk of pollution to controlled waters; the height, scale and massing of the building being out of keeping with the character and appearance of the area; and failure to secure Section 106 requirements. Application reference 06/01840/OUT was also refused on detailed highway/parking grounds.
24-32 Canute Road and 157-159 Albert Road South
07/01079/OUT
Planning permission was refused in February 2008 for redevelopment to provide 53 flats and 4 commercial units. The reasons for refusal related to flood risk and failure to secure safe access and egress from the site, unacceptable alterations to the highway, the lack of sustainability measures and failure to secure Section 106 obligations.
Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
A consultation exercise in line with department procedures has been undertaken. This has included notifying nearby occupiers and landowners, placing a press advertisement and displaying site notices. No representations have been received.
Summary of Consultation Comments
Environment Agency - object to the proposed development as submitted because there is insufficient information to demonstrate that the risk of pollution to controlled waters is acceptable. A preliminary risk assessment (including a desk study, conceptual model and initial assessment of risk) has not been provided. The EA accept that a desk study exists for the site and was submitted as part of the previous planning application. The objection could be removed if this information is submitted with the current application.
Southern Water – has no objection to the proposal providing conditions and informatives are imposed relating to drainage/sewerage issues. Initial investigations show that there is currently inadequate capacity in the local network to provide surface water disposal to service the proposed development. The applicant should investigate alternative means for surface water disposal.
British Airports Authority – have no aerodrome safeguarding objection to this proposal provided a condition is imposed relating to the submission of a bird hazard management plan.
Hampshire Police – have no objections given the similarities to the earlier application.
Environmental Health – no objections at this stage, further details will be needed by condition on extract ventilation, refuse storage and disposal arrangements and land contamination.
Planning Consideration Key Issues
The key issues in considering this proposal are: 1. The principle of this development and the suitability of the site for a mixed use development. 2. Design issues relating to the amount of development proposed and the impact on the character of the area. 3. Flood risk and mitigation measures. 4. Transportation issues
The principle of the development
This is an outline application and the development of the part of the site occupied by buildings is very similar to the previous application (reference 08/00332/OUT). The main differences between the two schemes is an alteration to the layout of the highway in Albert Road South and the exclusion of the majority of the museum site from the development site. The principle of redeveloping the site for a predominantly residential development has been accepted by this previous approval in May 2008.
Canute Road and Albert Road South are characterised by a mixture of architectural styles, building heights and uses in an area well served by public transport. None of the buildings on the site are of any significant architectural or historic merit. On the Canute Road part of the site, the development provides an active ground floor frontage with flats above similar to other recently approved schemes. The principle of additional housing is supported by adopted Local Plan policies H1 and H2 which seek to maximise the use of previously developed land subject to the detailed consideration of the proposed design, the impact on the character of the area and other amenity considerations. The mix of dwellings does not incorporate any family sized units with garden access as recommended by the recently adopted supplementary planning guidance. However, as this is effectively a re-submission of an earlier approved scheme and the site is not particularly well suited to family housing this is considered to be reasonable in the particular circumstances of this site.
Design issues
This is a relatively high density development of approximately 140 dwellings per hectare. This level of development is similar to other recently approved schemes in the City Centre. The building height guidelines recommended by supplementary planning guidance (the Development Design Guide) is for 4 to 6-storeys in this area. The proposed building fronting Albert Road South has an additional roof storey which takes the building up to 7- storeys in height. However, this is compatible with the development under construction at the Canute Road/Royal Crescent junction and would enable a graduation in scale to the adjoining building at Atlantic Mansions which itself has been the subject of applications for additional storeys to be added.
Flood Risk
The application site is located within an area of medium flood risk. Previous applications for this site have been refused permission on the grounds that safe access to the development could not be provided through the lifetime of the development. The current application seeks to overcome this reason for refusal by a proposal to raise the road level to a minimum height of 3.95 metres AOD to facilitate escape to higher ground at the approach to the Itchen Bridge. These arrangements have been agreed with the Environment Agency and can be controlled by condition as can the other flood mitigation measures specified in the application.
Transportation
The proposal to change the status of the public highway in Albert Road South to reduce through traffic and create a shared surface with greater pedestrian priority is supported by highways colleagues. The detailed road closure procedure arrangements can only take place once planning permission has been granted. The application would result in minor changes to the access arrangements for the museum car park but would otherwise leave the museum site unaffected.
Car parking is a key determinant in the choice of mode of travel and the site is close to principal bus routes. The Local Plan aims to reduce reliance on the private car and encourage alternative modes of transportation such as public transport, walking and cycling. The implementation of maximum parking standards is key to achieving this. It is perfectly feasible that some residents will choose to live in this location and not have access to a vehicle. The proposed level of on-site parking meets Local Plan standards.
CONCLUSION
The buildings and the amount of development proposed is identical to that previously agreed under application reference 08/00332/OUT. When assessed against Local Plan policies and supplementary planning guidance, it is considered that the proposed scale and massing of the block is acceptable. The level of development proposed will not result in an adverse impact on the amenities enjoyed by surrounding occupiers. Flood risk issues have been satisfactorily addressed. The application is in outline form and detailed matters of design and sustainability considerations can be dealt with at the reserved matters stage. The scheme is recommended for approval subject to a Section 106 agreement and conditions.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 1(d), 2(c), 3(a), 6(a), 6(c), 6(d), 6(f), 6(h), 7(a), 7(c), 7(k), 7 (w), 8(a), 9(a), 9(b) (RP/ for 24.11.09 PROW Panel )
RECOMMENDATION: DEL
CONDITIONS for 09/00966/OUT
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Outline Permission Timing Condition
Outline Planning Permission for the principle of the development proposed and the following matters sought for consideration, namely the layout of buildings and other external ancillary areas, the means of access (vehicular and pedestrian) into the site and the buildings, the scale, massing and bulk of the structure, is approved subject to the following: (i) Written approval of the details of the following awaited reserved matters shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority prior to any works taking place on the site the appearance and architectural design specifying the external materials to be used, and the landscaping of the site specifying both the hard, soft treatments and means of enclosures. (ii) An application for the approval of the outstanding reserved matters shall be made in writing to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this Outline Permission (iii) The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of five years from the date of this Outline permission, or before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last application of the reserved matters to be approved whichever is the latter.
Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail and to comply with Section 91 and Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Amenity Space Access [Pre-Occupation Condition]
The external amenity space serving the development hereby approved, and pedestrian access to it, shall be made available as a communal area prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be retained with access to it at all times for the use of the flat units.
REASON: To ensure the provision of adequate amenity space in association with the approved flats.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION- Land Contamination investigation and remediation [Pre- Commencement & Occupation Condition]
Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following phases, unless identified as unnecessary by the preceding phase and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
1. A desk top study including; historical and current sources of land contamination results of a walk-over survey identifying any evidence of land contamination identification of the potential contaminants associated with the above an initial conceptual site model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors a qualitative assessment of the likely risks any requirements for exploratory investigations.
2. A report of the findings of an exploratory site investigation, characterising the site and allowing for potential risks (as identified in phase 1) to be assessed.
3. A scheme of remediation detailing the remedial actions to be taken and how they will be implemented.
On completion of the works set out in (3) a verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming the remediation actions that have been undertaken in accordance with the approved scene of remediation and setting out any measures for maintenance, further monitoring, reporting and arrangements for contingency action. The verification report shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation or operational use of any stage of the development. Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure land contamination risks associated with the site are appropriately investigated and assessed with respect to human health and the wider environment and where required remediation of the site is to an appropriate standard.
04. APPROVAL CONDITION- Unsuspected Contamination [Performance Condition]
The site shall be monitored for evidence of unsuspected contamination throughout construction. If potential contamination is encountered that has not previously been identified no further development shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall not recommence until an assessment of the risks presented by the contamination has been undertaken and the details of the findings and any remedial actions has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Any changes to the agreed remediation actions will require the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure any land contamination not previously identified is assessed and remediated so as not to present any significant risks to human health or, the wider environment.
05. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use of uncontaminated soils and fill [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site.
Reason: To ensure imported materials are suitable and do not introduce any land contamination risks onto the development.
06. APPROVAL CONDITION - Archaeological investigation [Pre-Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is initiated at an appropriate point in development procedure.
07. APPROVAL CONDITION - Archaeological work programme [Performance Condition]
The developer will secure the completion of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is completed.
08. APPROVAL CONDITION - Flooding (Pre-Occupation)
The residential accommodation hereby approved shall not be first occupied until the raised platform in Albert Road South has been provided to a minimum height of 3.95 metres Above Ordnance Datum in accordance with detailed drawings which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON To ensure the safety of future occupiers of the development in the event of a flood.
09. APPROVAL CONDITION - Public Realm Improvements (Pre-Occupation Condition)
Full details of the design and treatment of the proposed alterations to the public highway in Albert Road South including details of vehicular access arrangements, materials, lighting, fittings, public art and other street furniture shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be completed before the first occupation of any part of the residential accommodation hereby approved.
REASON To ensure satisfactory treatment of this important public space
10. APPROVAL CONDITION - Bird Hazard Management Plan (Pre-Commencement Condition)
Development shall not commence until a Bird Hazard Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted plan shall include details of management of any flat/shallow pitched/green roofs on the buildings within the site which may be attractive to nesting, roosting and "loafing" birds (possible different management strategies during the breeding season and outside the breeding season). The Bird Hazard Management Plan shall be implemented as approved upon the completion of the development and shall remain in force for the life of the building. No subsequent alterations to the plan are to take place unless first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON It is necessary to manage the roofs of the development in order to minimise its attractiveness to birds which could endanger the safe movement of aircraft and the operation of Southampton Airport.
For information: The Bird Hazard Management Plan must ensure that flat/shallow pitched roofs be constructed to allow access to all areas by foot using permanent fixed access stairs, ladders or similar. The owner/occupier must not allow gulls, to nest, roost or loaf on the building. Checks must be made weekly or sooner if bird activity dictates, during the breeding season. Outside of the breeding season, gull activity must be monitored and the roof checked regularly to ensure that gulls do not utilise the roof. Any gulls found nesting, roosting or loafing must be dispersed by the owner/occupier when detected or when requested by BAA Airfield Operations Staff. In some instances, it may be necessary to contact BAA Airfield Operations staff before bird dispersal takes place. The owner/occupier must remove any nests or eggs found on the roof.
The breeding season for gulls typically runs from March to June. The owner/occupier must obtain the appropriate licences from Natural England before the removal of nests and eggs.
11. APPROVAL CONDITION - No Pile Driving for Foundations [Performance Condition]
No percussion or impact driven pilling activities shall take place for pre-works, foundations, or as any part of the development.
Reason: In the interests of securing the stability of the site and adjacent land in order to protect the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties.
12. APPROVAL CONDITION - Refuse & Recycling [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Before the works commence details (and amended plans) of facilities to be provided for the storage, removal and recycling of refuse from the premises shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing. Such facilities as approved shall provide for a level approach and be permanently maintained and retained for that purpose.
Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, the amenities of future occupiers of the development and the occupiers of nearby properties and in the interests of highway safety.
13. APPROVAL CONDITION - Noise - plant and machinery [Pre-Commencement Condition]
The use hereby approved shall not commence until an acoustic report and written scheme to minimise noise from plant and machinery associated with the proposed development, including details of location, orientation and acoustic enclosure, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the agreed details.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby properties.
14. APPROVAL CONDITION - Extract Ventilation - control of noise, fumes and odour [Pre- Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place until a written scheme for the control of noise, fumes and odours from extractor fans and other equipment have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and findings.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby properties.
15. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
16. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
17. APPROVAL CONDITION - Car Parking Allocation (Pre-Occupation Condition)
No part of the development shall be occupied until a car parking allocation scheme, to show how car parking spaces will be allocated to the various uses and occupiers, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The car parking spaces shall be allocated and provided in accordance with the approved scheme and thereafter shall be retained for use in connection with the approved development and for no other purpose.
REASON To ensure that the car parking is provided in accordance with Council policies.
18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Layout of Car Parking/Servicing (Pre-Occupation Condition)
The whole of the car parking, cycle storage and servicing facilities shown on the approved plans shall be laid out and made available before the use of the building to which these facilities relate commences and thereafter retained solely for the use of the occupants and visitors to the site and for no other purpose.
REASON To ensure adequate on-site parking and servicing facilities and to avoid congestion in the adjoining highway.
19. APPROVAL CONDITION - Bicycle Stands (Pre-Occupation Condition)
The building shall not be occupied in full or in part until cycle stands have been made available for visitors to the site in accordance with plans to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved cycle stands shall thereafter be retained on site for that purpose.
REASON To encourage cycling as a sustainable form of transport.
20. APPROVAL CONDITION - Construction Method Statement (Pre-Commencement Condition)
The development hereby approved shall not commence until a method statement and appropriate drawings of the means of construction of the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The method statement shall specify vehicular access arrangements, the areas to be used for contractor's vehicle parking and plant, storage of building materials and any excavated material, temporary buildings and all working areas required for the construction of the development hereby permitted. The building works shall proceed in accordance with the approved method statement unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON To protect the amenities of neighbours and the wider environment
21. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of Use (Performance Condition)
Those parts of the development to be used for purposes within Class A3 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (or any order replacing or amending this Order) shall not be open for public use outside the hours of 0730 to 2330.
REASON To protect the amenities of residents within the site and occupiers of adjoining residential properties.
22. APPROVAL CONDITION - Security Details (Pre-Occupation Condition)
Details of security arrangements for the residential development hereby approved including access to communal entrances and the car parking areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be implemented before first occupation of the residential accommodation and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON In the interests of safety and security.
23. APPROVAL CONDITION - Surface Water Drainage (Pre-Commencement Condition)
No development shall commence until details of the proposed means of surface water disposal have been submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Southern Water. The development shall be carried out in accordance with these approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason In order that the Local Planning Authority may be satisfied that the development would not increase the risk of flooding in the area.
24. APPROVAL CONDITION - Sustainable Design Measures (Pre-Commencement Condition)
No development shall take place until the applicant has provided to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing a report assessing the feasibility of incorporating the following sustainable design measures into the development:
Energy minimisation and renewable energy or low carbon technologies; Water efficiency measures Urban Drainage Systems; Waste Management and recycling; Sustainable construction materials; Rainwater harvesting.
The report shall include an action plan detailing how these measures will be integrated into the development. The approved scheme shall then be provided in accordance with these details prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent.
REASON To ensure the development minimises overall demand for resources and is compliant with the City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006) policies SDP13 and SDP6.
25. APPROVAL CONDITION - Code for Sustainable Homes [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve a minimum level 3 standard in the Code for Sustainable Homes (or equivalent ratings using an alternative recognised assessment method), shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent.
Reason: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy SDP13 of the City of Southampton Local Plan (2006).
00. REASON FOR GRANTING PERMISSION
The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The Council has also taken into account the findings of the specialist reports submitted with the application particularly that relating to flood risk. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, planning permission should therefore be granted.
Policies SDP1, SDP2, SDP3, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP13, H1, H2, H7, H9, H12, IMP1. City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006).
NOTE TO APPLICANT A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development. To initiate a sewer capacity check to identify the appropriate connection point for the development please contact Atkins Ltd, Anglo St James House, 39A Southgate Street, Winchester, SO23 9EH (tel: 01962 858688) or www.southernwater.co.uk)
APPENDIX 3 Appendix 3 PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 24 TH NOVEMBER 2009
Present: Councillor Fitzhenry (Chair), Councillors Mrs Blatchford, Cunio, Davis, Jones (Vice- Chair), Norris and Osmond
38, CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS Copy of all reports circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes.
38.4
09/00966/OUT 24-32 Canute Road, 157-159 Albert Road South and adjoining public highway
Redevelopment of the site with a 6-storey building fronting Canute Road and a 7-storey building fronting Albert Road South to provide 53 flats (37 x one bedroom and 16 x two-bedroom) and four Class A1/A3 commercial units with associated car parking, landscaping and highway works including the closure of part of the public highway in Albert Road South (Outline application seeking approval for layout, access and scale).
Mr Nye (Applicant) was present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE AMENDED OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MANAGER TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED
(i) that authority be delegated to the Development Control Manager to grant conditional planning approval subject to:- a) the conditions in the report, the amended and additional conditions below; b) the applicant entering into a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure:
1 site specific highway works in the vicinity of the site to be secured through a Section 278 agreement;
2 provision of affordable housing in accordance with policy;
3 a financial contribution towards public realm improvements in accordance with policy;
4 a financial contribution towards strategic transport improvements in accordance with policy;
5 a financial contribution towards open space improvements in accordance with policy;
6 a highway condition survey;
7 Training and Employment Management Plan;
8 dedication of land to public use on the north side of Albert Road South in connection with alterations to the public highway;
9 a requirement that the development shall not commence, save for demolition of the existing buildings and such site preparation as shall be agreed until the road closure procedure has been finalised;
10 the developer paying for the necessary Traffic Regulation Order;
11 submission and implementation of a Travel Plan;
12 Resource Conservation Measures to comply with Policy SDP 13 of the Local Plan;
(ii) that the Development Control Manager be authorised to refuse permission should the Section 106 Agreement not be completed within two months from the date of determination, on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Agreement.
Amended Conditions
3 – Land/Groundwater Contamination
Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) the following components of a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority:
(i) a preliminary risk assessment which has identified: all previous uses • potential contaminants associated with those uses • a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors • potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site.
(ii) a site investigation scheme, based on (i) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.
(iii) the site investigation results and the detailed risk assessment (ii) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
(iv) a verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in (iii) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action.
Any changes to these components require the express consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.
REASON: To protect the minor aquifer beneath the site and the surface waters in the vicinity. The site may be contaminated due to previous activities that have taken place on site. Risk to groundwater and surface water has not yet been fully established at the site.
4 – Unsuspected Contamination
If during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site, then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.
REASON: To protect controlled waters from contamination. Due to the historic uses of the site, there may be areas of contamination on site that are not identified and characterised during intrusive site investigations.
8 – Flooding
No development shall take place until the raised platform in Albert Road South has been provided to a minimum height of 3.95 metres above Ordnance Datum as shown on the approved drawings and the vehicle turning areas to be provided shall be identified in accordance with detailed drawings which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON: To ensure the safety of future occupiers of the development in the event of a flood.
Additional Conditions
26 – Contamination Verification Report
Prior to commencement of development, a verification report demonstrating completion of the works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan a “long-term monitoring and maintenance plan”) for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action, as identified in the verification plan, and for the reporting of this to the local planning authority.
REASON: To ensure that any remediation is satisfactorily completed, if deemed necessary.
27 – Piling
Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to groundwater.
REASON: To protect controlled waters from contamination by preventing the creation of potential contaminant pathways.
28 – Flood Risk Mitigation
Prior to the development hereby approved being occupied the development must fully comply with the mitigation strategy detailed within the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), FRMS07123-4, 17th August 2009 and drawing 2009/SOU/03 Revision P4.
REASON:
To ensure that a site can be developed safely the FRA is proposing mitigation measures that ensure that flood risk to the development is managed. It is essential that this mitigation is completed before any of the site is occupied
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. The Council has also taken into account the findings of the specialist reports submitted with the application particularly that relating to flood risk. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, planning permission should therefore be granted.
Policies SDP1, SDP2, SDP3, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP13, H1, H2, H7, H9, H12, IMP1. City of Southampton Local Plan (March 2006). Agenda Item 11
Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26 October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address: 69 - 72 St. Mary Street Southampton
Proposed de velopment: Re-development of the site. Erection of a four-storey building to provide 13 flats (11 X one bed, 2 X two bed) and a retail unit (Class A1) with associated parking and storage.
Application 10/00006/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Andrew Gregory Public speaking 15 minutes time Last date for OVER Ward Bargate determination: Reason for Panel Major with associated Ward Councillors Cllr Bogle referral planning agreement Cllr Damani Cllr Willacy
Applicant : Mr Phillip Farminer Ag ent: HGP Architects Ltd (Mr Matthew Edwards)
Recommendation Delegate to Planning and Development Manager to grant Summary planning permission subject to criteria listed in report
Appendix attached 1 Development Plan Policies
Reason for Granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Overall the proposed mixed use development is acceptable and the level of development proposed will not adversely harm the character and appearance of the area having regard to the regeneration benefits of redeveloping this site and also the case put forward for loosing commercial floor space at ground floor level. On balance, the proposal will not undermine the vitality and viability of this local centre. The residential environment for future occupiers is acceptable given the site’s proximity to the city centre. A suitable balance has been achieved between securing additional residential accommodation and parking, whilst ensuring that existing residential amenities are protected. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Planning Permission should therefore be granted.
Policies SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, H1, H2 and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS16, CS19, CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010); National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010) and PPG13 (Transport) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
1
Recommendation in Full
Delegate to the Planning and Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement to secure:
i. Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended);
ii. A financial contribution towards strategic transport projects for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG/D;
iii. Financial contributions towards the relevant elements of public open space required by the development in line with polices CLT5, CLT6 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policy CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended):-
Amenity Open Space (“open space”) Playing Field Children’s play area;
iv. In lieu of an affordable housing contribution an undertaking by the developer that only students in full time education be permitted to occupy the studio flats;
v. Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer.
In the event that the legal agreement is not completed within 1 month following the date of this decision the Planning and Development Manager be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.
1. The site and its context
1.1 The application site comprises 69-72 St Mary Street which has been cleared for redevelopment purposes. The site was previously occupied by three-storey units with ground floor commercial use and ancillary space and residential accommodation on the upper floors. The site is situated between the ‘Plume of Feathers’ public house; a two- storey character property at the corner with Kingsland Market, and 66-68 St Mary; a four-storey building containing ground floor commercial use and flatted accommodation on the upper floors. A surface car park is located to the rear of the site with access onto Kingsway.
1.2 St Marys Street is a mixed use local centre. Infill flatted blocks and office development up to 4-storey in scale have been integrated into the street scene. The area is highly accessible and located in close proximity to city centre parks and other amenities.
2
2. Proposal
2.1 The application seeks full planning permission to redevelop the site with the erection of a four-storey building comprising a ground floor retail unit (Class A1) and 13 flats (11 X One Bed, 2 X Two Bed). The rear car parking area provides 6 parking spaces to serve the development. The rear bin and cycle store currently serving 66-68 St Mary street would be enlarged for shared use.
2.2 The ground floor commercial unit has an area of 60 square metres with primary access from St Mary Street. The flats are also primarily accessed from St Marys Street via a communal entrance, with secondary access to the rear. The flat on the ground floor frontage (flat 1) has been recessed to provide some defensible space to that unit. The rear 2-bedroom flat (flat 2) is also provided with some defensible space. The first and second floors comprise 1-bedroom units. The third floor flats are served by private roof terraces.
2.3 The proposal seeks a contemporary design approach with modern window openings and balustrade detailing. The materials palette includes a mix of yellow stock bricks, render, blue/black engineering bricks, timber cladding and slate (or similar material) on the roof. The upper floor is recessed to incorporate the roof terraces. The building has a shallow pitch roof and incorporates raised solar panels. The commercial unit has a traditional shop front design and incorporates space for fascia signage and security shutters.
2.4 The submitted Design & Access statement indicates that the units have been designed to achieve a Code for sustainable Homes rating of Code Level 3.
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
3.2 St Mary Street was previously safeguarded as a local centre under policy REI6 of the Local Plan Review which promoted commercial, leisure and community uses at street level and residential use on the upper floors. This policy has now been superseded by policy CS3 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy; however St Mary Street has been omitted from the current list of Local Centres because it is to be included within the emerging City Centre Action plan. Saved policy MSA12 of the Local Plan Review safeguards this part of St Mary’s street for mixed use development for shops (A1), offices (B1 and A2) and housing (C3).
3.3 Major developments are expected to meet high sustainable construction standards in accordance with the City Council’s adopted and emerging policies. In accordance with adopted Core Strategy Policy CS20 and Local Plan “saved” Policy SDP13.
3
4.0 Relevant Planning History
04/00026/FUL WITHDRAWN 25.08.2005 Redevelopment of the site to provide two blocks (three and four storey linked by an external walkway) containing 14 x 1 bedroom flats together with a ground floor shop unit to one block and a workshop to the other.
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners and erecting a site notice (enter date). At the time of writing the report no representations have been received from surrounding residents.
5.2 SCC Highways – No objection subject to conditions to secure car parking and also to require on-site wheel cleaning facilities during any build.
5.3 SCC Housing – No objection.
5.4 SCC Sustainability Team – No objection. The development proposes to meet code level 3 and a 15% reduction in CO 2 emissions through renewable which should be secured through condition.
5.5 SCC Architect’s Panel – The amended design approach is welcomed. However there will be a jump in scale where the building abuts the ‘Plume of Feathers’ public house; this change in scale will dwarf the pub and may create redevelopment pressure on the pub site.
5.6 City Design Team – No objection. The change in scale with the pub is an acceptable arrangement and will not harm the street scene. The Secure by Design Officer should be consulted on the proposed means of enclosure to the ground floor defensible space.
5.7 SCC Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) – No objection. However in view of the sensitive nature of the proposed residential use a thorough assessment of the potential land contamination hazards is recommended. Planning conditions should be applied.
5.8 SCC Ecology – No objection.
5.9 Hampshire Constabulary – The applicant is currently in dialogue with the Secure by Design officer and an update will be provided at the panel meeting.
5.10 Southern Water – No objection subject to conditions to safeguard the public sewer and to secure details of means of foul and surface water disposal. An informative should be applied regarding connection to the public sewer network.
5.11 Archaeology - No objection. Due to the nature and high archaeological potential of the site, a full programme of archaeological assessment, evaluation and excavation work will be required in advance of the development. Apply conditions.
4
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are:
6.2 Principle of Development
6.2.1 The re-development of the site for mixed use development comprising residential and retail use will contribute towards the regeneration of St Mary’s Street and is complaint with saved policy MSA12 of the Local Plan Review. The introduction of part residential use at ground floor level is supported in this instance, having regard to the viability case put forward by Hyde housing.
6.2.2 The proposed level of residential development has a density of 285 dwellings per hectare which is acceptable within this area of high accessibility and accords with central government’s wishes for more intensive use of brown field sites for housing delivery. The proposed residential mix of 11 x 1-bed units and 1 x 2-bed units is acceptable having regard to the established character of St Mary’s Street and will meet a recognised housing need identified by Hyde Housing.
6.2.3 A minimum of 20% affordable housing will be secured as a planning obligation in accordance with CS15 of the Core Strategy.
6.3 Residential design and impact on established character
6.3.1 A Design and Access Statement has been submitted in accordance with the requirements of saved policy SDP6 of the Local Plan Review and identifies measures to be taken into account when maintaining the character of the area and achieving high standards of design.
6.3.2 The proposed building has a contemporary form which will complement and enhance the existing street scene. The scale and massing of the building respects the scale of established development within St Mary’s Street, notably the four-storey buildings occupying 63-68 St Mary’s Street. The top floor has been recessed to reflect the parapet height of the adjacent flatted block to the south. There will be a change in scale at the junction with the ‘Plume of Feathers’ however this is not considered adversely harmful to the character and appearance of the area and is not an uncommon arrangement in areas of high density, although careful consideration needs to be given to the treatment of the side (north-facing) gable. The fenestration detailing gives the building a vertical emphasis which acceptably responds to the surrounding context. Details of materials will be secured through condition; however an acceptable materials palette is currently proposed.
6.3.3 Part of the ground floor has been recessed to provide privacy and defensible space of the ground floor residential accommodation which is considered an acceptable design solution. The shop front and been designed to accommodate fascia signage which is welcomed.
6.4 Impact on Residential Amenity
6.4.1 The residential amenities of neighbouring residents will not be adversely harmed.
5
The proposed development will not give rise to a harmful sense of enclosure, loss of light, shadowing or overlooking / loss of privacy.
6.5 Residential Standards
6.5.1 In amenity terms the residential environment proposed for the potential occupants is acceptable. The internal layout is compatible with modern living standards and all habitable rooms are served by natural lighting and ventilation.
6.5.2 The amenity space provision is satisfactory for an edge of city centre location, with the provision of roof terraces for the top floor accommodation and a small area of defensible space at ground floor level. The site is well located for access to a wide range of amenities including central parks. It would be inappropriate to request the introduction of projecting balconies within this street scene given they are not an architectural feature within St Mary’s street.
6.6 Highway Issues
6.6.1 The application site is located within an area, which is defined as a high accessibility zone; this is defined in relation to principle bus routes and railway stations. The level of parking provision proposed needs to be assessed against the parking standards set within the adopted local plan. The development proposes 6 parking spaces which accords with the Councils maximum parking standards. The level of parking provision and access arrangement will not prejudice highway safety.
7.0 Summary
7.1 Overall the proposed mixed use development is acceptable and the level of development proposed will not adversely harm the character and appearance of the area having regard to the regeneration benefits of redeveloping this site and also the case put forward for loosing commercial floor space at ground floor level. On balance, the proposal will not undermine the vitality and viability of this local centre. The residential environment for future occupiers is acceptable given the sites proximity to the city centre. A suitable balance has been achieved between securing additional residential accommodation and parking, whilst ensuring that existing residential amenities are protected.
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 By securing the matters set out in the recommendations section of this report, the proposal would be acceptable. The application is therefore recommended for delegated approval to the Planning and Development Manager.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 3(a), 4(f), 5 (e), 6(a), 6(c), 6(f), 6(h), 7 (a), 7(b), 7(e), 7 (k), 7 (o), 7 (u), 7 (v), 9(a), 10 (a), 10 (b).
AG for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
6
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Full Permission Timing Condition - Physical works
The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Samples details of building materials to be used [Pre- Commencement Condition]
No work for the construction of the buildings hereby permitted shall commence unless and until details and samples of the materials and finishes to be used for the external walls, windows, doors and roof of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be implemented only in accordance with the agreed details.
Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interest of the visual amenities of the locality and to endeavour to achieve a building of high visual quality.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
04. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
7
05. APPROVAL CONDITION- Land Contamination investigation and remediation [Pre- Commencement & Occupation Condition]
Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following phases, unless identified as unnecessary by the preceding phase and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
1. A desk top study including; historical and current sources of land contamination results of a walk-over survey identifying any evidence of land contamination identification of the potential contaminants associated with the above an initial conceptual site model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors a qualitative assessment of the likely risks any requirements for exploratory investigations.
2. A report of the findings of an exploratory site investigation, characterising the site and allowing for potential risks (as identified in phase 1) to be assessed.
3. A scheme of remediation detailing the remedial actions to be taken and how they will be implemented.
On completion of the works set out in (3) a verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming the remediation actions that have been undertaken in accordance with the approved scene of remediation and setting out any measures for maintenance, further monitoring, reporting and arrangements for contingency action. The verification report shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation or operational use of any stage of the development. Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure land contamination risks associated with the site are appropriately investigated and assessed with respect to human health and the wider environment and where required remediation of the site is to an appropriate standard.
06. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use of uncontaminated soils and fill [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site.
Reason: To ensure imported materials are suitable and do not introduce any land contamination risks onto the development.
8
07. APPROVAL CONDITION- Unsuspected Contamination [Performance Condition]
The site shall be monitored for evidence of unsuspected contamination throughout construction. If potential contamination is encountered that has not previously been identified no further development shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall not recommence until an assessment of the risks presented by the contamination has been undertaken and the details of the findings and any remedial actions has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Any changes to the agreed remediation actions will require the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure any land contamination not previously identified is assessed and remediated so as not to present any significant risks to human health or, the wider environment.
08. APPROVAL CONDITION - Code for Sustainable Homes [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code For Sustainable Homes certification body.
REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
09. APPROVAL CONDITION - Renewable Energy (Pre-Commencement Condition)
Prior to development of this proposal commencing full details of the renewable energy systems to be incorporated within the development shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The details should include the full specification of the solar hot water heating system which shall achieve the agreed target of 15% reduced CO2 emissions as detailed within the agreed submitted energy assessment.
REASON: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
10. APPROVAL CONDITION - Sustainable Drainage Systems (Pre-Occupation Condition)
Prior to the commencement of development a feasibility study demonstrating an assessment of the potential for the creation of a sustainable drainage system on site shall be carried out and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any measures shown to be feasible shall be verified in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented prior to first occupation of the development hereby granted consent. If the study demonstrates the site has the capacity for the implementation of a sustainable drainage system, a specification shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. A sustainable
9 drainage system to the approved specification must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. In the development hereby granted consent, peak run-off rates and annual volumes of run-off shall be no greater than the previous conditions for the site.
REASON: To conserve valuable water resources, in compliance with and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010) and to prevent an increase in surface run-off and reduce flood risk.
11. APPROVAL CONDITION - Public Sewer protection [Performance Condition]
The developer must advise the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with Southern Water) of the measures which will be undertaken to protect the public sewers, prior to the commencement of the development.
Reason: In order to safeguard the public sewer.
12. APPROVAL CONDITION - Surface / foul water drainage [Pre-commencement Condition]
No development approved by this permission shall commence until a scheme for the disposal of foul water and surface water drainage have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and no building shall be occupied unless and until all drainage works have been carried out in accordance with such details as approved by the Local Planning Authority and subsequently implemented and maintained for use for the life of the development.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage provision for the area. 13. APPROVAL CONDITION - Active frontages Notwithstanding figure 92 of the applicant’s Design & Access Statement (January 2008 as updated) and the provisions of Class 12 of Schedule 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 2007 the occupier(s) of the non residential uses hereby approved on the ground floor shall retain an 'active window display' along the length of the shop frontages hereby approved (without the installation of window vinyls) in accordance with details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation the commercial unit.
REASON: In the interests of retaining a lively and attractive streetscene.
14. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of Use – Non Residential Uses The non residential uses hereby approved shall not operate outside of the hours hereby set out:
07:00 (7am) and 22:00 (10pm) 7 days a week including Sundays, Bank and/or Public Holidays.
REASON: In the interests of existing and proposed residential amenity
10
15. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of Delivery No deliveries shall be taken at or despatched from the site outside the hours of 07:00 (7am) and 22:00 (10pm) nor at any time on Sundays, Bank and/or Public Holidays.
REASON: In the interests of existing and proposed residential amenity
16. APPROVAL CONDITION – Archaeological investigation [Pre-Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is initiated at an appropriate point in development procedure
17. APPROVAL CONDITION – Archaeological work programme [Performance Condition]
The developer will secure the completion of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is completed.
18. APPROVAL CONDITION – Archaeological damage-assessment [Pre-Commencement Condition]
No development shall take place within the site until the type and dimensions of all proposed groundworks have been submitted to and agreed by the Local planning Authority. The developer will restrict groundworks accordingly unless a variation is agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To inform and update the assessment of the threat to the archaeological deposits.
11
Application 10/00006/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS3 Town, district and local centres CS4 Housing delivery CS5 Housing density CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change CS25 The Delivery of Infrastructure and Developer Contributions
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP13 Resource Conservation SDP16 Noise H1 Housing targets H2 Previously developed land H7 Residential environment
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing (2010) PPG13 Transport (2001) PPG17 Planning for open space, sport and recreation (2002) PPS23 Planning & Pollution Control (2004) PPG24 Planning & Noise (2004) PPG17 Planning for open space, sport and recreation (2002)
12
13 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 12 Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26th October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Ap plication address: Newlands Primary School, Ullswater Road, SO16 9EA
Proposed development: Erection of a new single-storey building to provide a new two form entry primary school and nursery with associated landscape works and sports facilities, including a multi-use games area and new vehicular and pedestrian access from Windermere Avenue. Demolition of the existing school upon completion of the new building.
Application 10/00933/R3CFL Application type FUL number Case officer Jenna Turner Public speaking 15 minutes time Last date for 17.11.10 Ward Redbridge determination: Reason for Panel This is a major Ward Councillors Cllr McEwing referral planning application Cllr Holmes submitted on behalf of Cllr Marsh-Jenks the City Council
Applicant : Southampton City Council Agent: Capita Symonds
Recommendation Delegate to Planning and Development Manager to grant Summary planning permission subject to criteria listed in report
Reason for Granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan and other guidance as set on the attached sheet. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. The proposal makes good use of the land for much needed primary school places. Where appropriate planning conditions have been imposed to mitigate any harm identified. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning Permission should therefore be granted having account of the following planning policies:
“Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP15, SDP16, SDP17, NE3, NE4 and CLT3 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS11, CS13, CS19, CS20, CS21 and CS22 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPG13 (Transport) and PPG24 (Planning & Noise) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
Appendix attached
1 Development Plan Policies 2 Planning History
1
Recommendation in Full
Delegate to the Planning and Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to:
1. the Head of Education giving a written undertaking for the provision of the following:
a)To implement an agreed series of site specific transport works under S.278 of the Highways Act in accordance with policies CS18, CS19 & CS25 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted Version (January 2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended);
b) A financial contribution towards strategic transport projects for highway network improvements in the wider area in accordance with policies CS18 & CS25 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted Version (January 2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended);
2. The submission of a satisfactory demolition and construction Phasing Plan, in accordance with policy CS11 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted Version (January 2010) and;
3. Details of the community use of the site, in accordance with policy CS11 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document - Adopted Version (January 2010).
1. Procedural Context
Councils Own Development
1.1 The proposed scheme is a Regulation 3 application for Planning Permission. A Regulation 3 application relates to proposals made by the Local Authority for development that it wishes to undertake as part of its remit as a public sector service provider.
1.2 It is general practice that following the proper assessment of the planning merits of the proposal, that Regulation 3 applications should be either approved if considered acceptable, or the application should be requested to be withdrawn if not considered acceptable for justifiable planning reasons that would normally result in a refusal.
2. Background
2.1 Newlands Primary School forms part of the Council's Primary School Review, the aim of which is to provide high-quality educational facilities within the city that can accommodate the increasing demand for primary school places. A central part of the review relates to the buildings themselves; which should be sustainable; equipped with up- to-date technology; provide flexible learning spaces and moreover; a stimulating environment for pupils. The review concluded that Newlands Primary school building is poor quality and that it was not economical or practical to upgrade the existing building and that it is a top priority for rebuilding.
2
3. The site and its context
3.1 Newlands primary and nursery school provides two linked wings for the infant and junior school. The building which was originally constructed in the 1950s, has an irregular layout, and is single-storey in scale. The school has been extended with a series of modular classrooms. The existing vehicle access to the school is from Ullswater Road and the parking area is adjacent to the north-west site boundary. There is a further pedestrian access into the site from Mansel Road East.
3.2 The school lies within a residential area and the site boundaries are lined by mature trees, which provide screening from the residential properties which neighbour the site. To the north-west corner of the site is Pickles Coppice, which is a community building and Sure Start facility. Beyond the south-east boundary of the site is an area of allotments.
4. Proposal
4.1 The application proposes a replacement school and nursery building which would be positioned to the north of the site, taking its main vehicle and pedestrian access from Windemere Avenue. The new building is designed to accommodate a 40 place nursery and a two form entry level primary school which could accommodate 420 pupils. Currently, the site accommodates just under 200 pupils.
4.2 The new building would have a horseshoe shaped layout around a central courtyard, with the nursery and infants accommodation positioned to the west of the courtyard with the junior school accommodation to the east. Approximately 2400sq.m of new floorspace would be provided. The main classrooms are arranged to enjoy outlook either over the school grounds or the courtyard. The main entrance into the building itself would address Windermere Avenue.
4.3 The building would have a single-storey scale with a double-height main hall section to the centre of the building. The building would have a contemporary design appearance with the use of glazing and elements of coloured panels and coloured render.
4.4 The existing car parking area (comprising 19 spaces) and vehicular access from Ullswater Close would be retained as a staff-only car park and a further 22 car parking spaces, including 2 disabled spaces, would be provided to the north of the proposed building. There is the potential for the MUGA to offer a community use during daylight hours or at the weekends. A secure pedestrian link from Pickles Coppice community centre into the site would also be provided.
4.5 Replacement playing pitches would be provided to the south of the site and would include two hard-surface games courts. A new Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) would be provided to the south of Pickles Coppice, although it is not intended that this should be flood lit. The layout also provides for areas for informal play immediately adjacent to the new building.
5. Relevant Planning Policy
5.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
3
5.2 The existing playing pitches are designated under Local Plan Policy CLT3. Policy CS21 seeks to protect existing open space from development. Core Strategy Policy CS11 supports the development of new educational facilities on school sites and encourages wider community use of those facilities outside of school hours.
5.3 Major developments are expected to meet high sustainable construction standards in accordance with the City Council’s adopted policies, namely adopted Core Strategy Policy CS20 and Local Plan "saved" policy SDP13.
6. Relevant Planning History
5.1 The planning history for Newlands School is included in Appendix 2 .
7. Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
7.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners, placing a press advertisement (09.09.10) and erecting a site notice (02.09.10). At the time of writing the report 0 representations have been received.
7.2 SCC Highways - No objection. Suggests conditions to secure the detailed design of the refuse store, details of cycle storage and a Travel Plan. Advise that deliveries relating to construction and the servicing of the biomass plant should take place outside of school hours.
7.3 SCC Planning Policy - No objection raised. The proposal is compliant with adopted policies.
7.4 SCC Sustainability Team - No objection subject to the impositions of conditions to secure the submitted sustainability measures, including a biomass boiler on site.
7.5 SCC Environmental Health (Pollution & Safety) - No objection. Suggests conditions to prevent the installation of lighting to the MUGA and to restrict the hours of use of the MUGA.
7.6 SCC Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) - No objection. The site could be affected by historic land contamination and therefore conditions are suggested to secure a Contamination Assessment and any necessary remediation measures.
7.7 SCC Archaeology - No objection. Suggests conditions to secure a programme of archaeological work prior to the commencement of development and a watching brief to be conducted during groundworks.
7.8 SCC Ecology – No objection. The area to be developed has limited biodiversity value. The new access is unlikely to result in harmful disturbance to wildlife. The proposed pond and wildflower grassland will help to improve the biodiversity value of the site. Suggests a condition to secure an Ecological Mitigation Statement.
7.9 SCC Trees - No objection. The application would result in the loss of some trees on the west side of the entrance from Windermere Avenue. These are however of poor form and their loss would not have a significant affect on the amenity of the area. Furthermore, the extensive replacement tree planting would compensate for their removal.
4
7.10 Sport England - No objection. The playing which would be lost will be replaced by playing fields of of equivalent or greater quantity and improved sports facilities would be provided.
7.11 Southern Water – No objection. Suggests conditions to secure details of foul and surface water disposal and grease interceptors to drainage from kitchen areas.
8. Planning Consideration Key Issues
8.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: i. The principle of development; ii. Sports pitch re-provision; iii. The acceptability of the design; iv. Impacts on residential amenity; v. Highways and parking issues; and, vi. The sustainability of the proposal.
8.2 Principle of Development
8.2.1 The site is currently in educational use (Use Class D1) and the redevelopment proposal to provide enhanced educational facilities is in accordance with Policy CS11 (An Educated City) of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010). Whilst the number of pupils that could be accommodated by the school is greater than the existing situation, the floorspace of the proposed building is less than which currently exists, meaning the proposal would represent a more efficient use of the site. The development is designed to enable use by the wider community outside of school hours in accordance with policy CS11. In particular, the provision of a new MUGA and the improved playing field layout provides an opportunity for after hours use of the site by the local community.
8.3 Sports Pitch Re-Provision 8.3.1 As part of this application for the replacement school, the applicant needs to satisfy the Local Planning Authority that the redevelopment can be undertaken without compromising the school’s ability to provide continuous education provision, including access to external play space to serve the needs of the pupils. LDF Core Strategy Policy CS21 (Protecting and Enhancing Open Space) seeks to retain the quantity, and improve the quality, of existing open space provision. There is a presumption against developing existing school playing pitches unless alternative provision of equal (if not better) space is provided.
8.3.2 Since the proposed school building has a lesser footprint than the existing school, the proposal would enable an increase in playing pitch provision on the site. The proposal would provide a Multi Use Games Area (MUGA), four mini football pitches, a full size football pitch, a basketball court and a netball court. Conditions are suggested to secure a phasing plan for the delivery of the new playing pitches and an assessment of their quality. The applicants have been asked to provide an indicative phasing plan prior to determination to satisfactorily demonstrate that continuous education with access to useable outdoor playspace is possible during the construction phase. A verbal update will be given at the Panel meeting.
5
8.4 Character and Design 8.4.1 The new school building would address Windemere Avenue and the double-height central section gives the building presence from this street. The design represents a significant improvement when compared to the existing school building and a legible layout would be created. 8.4.2 The mature tree screening to the site boundaries would be retained. The trees proposed to be removed would not have a harmful affect on the visual amenity of the area or reduce the screening value when viewed from the surrounding properties and streets. An indicative landscape plan been provided which includes extensive tree planting to create a high-quality setting for the building. In addition to this, the front car parking area would be softened with trees and planting beds. A planning condition is recommended to secure this scheme. 8.4.3 The application also proposes enhanced security measures including new boundary treatment, CCTV and an outdoor lighting upgrade. Planning conditions are recommended to secure these measures.
8.5 Residential Amenity 8.5.1 The new school building would be approximately 36 metres from the nearest residential properties to the east of the site, on Borrowdale Road. Its single-storey scale, and the intervening tree screening,would ensure that it would not have a harmful impact on residential amenity. There is 40 metres separation between the new MUGA and nearest residential neighbours on Ullswater Road. As it is not intended to be floodlit it is unlikely to result in harmful noise or disturbance to the residential neighbours. The Environmental Health Officer is satisfied that subject to imposition of conditions which restrict the hours of use of the MUGA and to prevent the installation of lighting, that the proposal would be acceptable in this respect.
8.6 Highways and Parking 8.6.1 The new access from Windemere Avenue would relieve the pressure on the existing Ullswater Road entrance which currently suffers from congestion during school drop-off and collection times. The pedestrian and vehicle access points into the site would be segregated which would represent an improvement in highway safety terms. The number of parking spaces proposed is in accordance with the adopted maximum standards for this area of 'Low Accessibility'. The servicing of the school would also take place from Windemere Avenue and an area for the turning of larger vehicles has been designed into the parking area.
8.7 Sustainability 8.7.1 A biomass woodchip boiler is proposed which would provide a 45% reduction in Carbon Dioxide emissions. In addition to this, it is intended that the school with achieve the 'Very Good' standard of BREEAM and a pre-assessment report has been submitted to demonstrate how this could be achieved. Conditions are suggested to secure the proposed sustainability measures.
9. Summary 9.1 The application proposes a high-quality design solution to the improvement of the educational and community facilities that the site currently delivers. The application proposal would provide a valuable new education facility, which would meet a local need identified in the Primary School Review. The scheme would deliver an improved quantity and quality of the sports pitches available. The proposal would represent an improvement in highway safety terms and the design and layout of the site would minimise the impact on residential amenity.
6
10. Conclusion 10.1 This application has been assessed as being acceptable to residential amenity and its local context. The application is therefore recommended for conditional approval subject to a satisfactory indicative phasing plan and details of community use being submitted prior to determination.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2(c), 2(d), 2(e), 4(s), 6(a), 6(c), 6(d), 6(h), 6(g), 6(k), 7(a), 7(m), 7(v), 8(a), 9(a), 9(b)
JT for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Full Permission Timing Condition - Physical works
The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Details of building materials to be used [pre- commencement condition]
Notwithstanding the details shown on the approved drawings no works shall commence on the construction of the external elevations of the buildings hereby approved until a schedule of materials and finishes (including full details of the manufacturers, types and colours of the external materials) to be used for external walls, windows and the roof of the proposed buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavoring to achieve a building of visual quality.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION - Community Use Agreement [pre-commencement condition]
Prior to the commencement of use a Community Use Agreement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This agreement shall include details of hours of use, access by non-school users, management responsibilities, pricing policy, and include a mechanism for review that would involve both Sport England and the Local Planning Authority as required. The approved agreement shall be implemented upon commencement of use of the development.
REASON To secure well managed safe community access to the sports facilities on site and to ensure sufficient benefit to the development of sport and to accord with Local Plan policy.
04. APPROVAL CONDITION – Assessment of Playing Pitch Quality [pre-commencement condition]
7
Before works on the playing pitches commences, a scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority to demonstrate that the playing fields can be provided to an acceptable quality. The scheme shall include an assessment of the ground conditions of the land proposed for the sports facility (including drainage and topography) which identify the constraints which could affect playing field quality. The development shall proceed in accordance with the agreed details.
REASON To ensure that the playing pitches are provided to an acceptable quality
05. APPROVAL CONDITION – Playing Pitch Provision [performance condition]
The playing pitches shall be provided in accordance with a phasing plan to be submitted and agreed by the Local Planning Authority prior to development works commencing. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the sports pitches shall be laid out in accordance with drawing number LA701 P4 received on the 21st September 2010.
REASON To ensure that the appropriate number and type of pitches are provided
06. APPROVAL CONDITION – Hours of work for Demolition / Construction [performance condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA.
REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
07. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway. REASON: In the interests of highway safety.
08. APPROVAL CONDITION - BREEAM Standards (commercial development) [Pre- Occupation Condition] Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development has achieved at minimum a rating of Very Good against the BREEAM standard shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified BREEAM certification body.
8
Reason: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
09. APPROVAL CONDITION - Biomass Boiler [Pre-Occupation Condition] The biomass boiler which shall achieve reduced CO2 emissions as detailed within the submitted energy assessment, must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
10. APPROVAL CONDITION - Sustainable Drainage Systems (Pre-Occupation Condition)
Prior to the commencement of development a feasibility study demonstrating an assessment of the potential for the creation of a sustainable drainage system on site shall be carried out and submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any measures shown to be feasible shall be verified in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented prior to first occupation of the development hereby granted consent. If the study demonstrates the site has the capacity for the implementation of a sustainable drainage system, a specification shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. A sustainable drainage system to the approved specification must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter. In the development hereby granted consent, peak run-off rates and annual volumes of run-off shall be no greater than the previous conditions for the site. REASON: To conserve valuable water resources, in compliance with and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010) and to prevent an increase in surface run-off and reduce flood risk.
11. APPROVAL CONDITION - Arboricultural Method Statement [performance condition]
All operations in connection with the development hereby permitted shall comply in full with the method statement included in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment & Tree Survey report by Sapling Arboriculture Ltd dated the 6th July 2010. Reason To ensure that provision for trees to be retained and adequately protected throughout the construction period has been made.
12. APPROVAL CONDITION – Archaeological investigation [Pre-Commencement Condition] No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is initiated at an appropriate point in development procedure.
9
13. APPROVAL CONDITION – Archaeological work programme [Performance Condition]
The developer will secure the completion of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that the archaeological investigation is completed.
14. APPROVAL CONDITION- Land Contamination investigation and remediation [Pre- Commencement & Occupation Condition] Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following phases, unless identified as unnecessary by the preceding phase and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
1. A desk top study including; historical and current sources of land contamination results of a walk-over survey identifying any evidence of land contamination identification of the potential contaminants associated with the above an initial conceptual site model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors a qualitative assessment of the likely risks any requirements for exploratory investigations.
2. A report of the findings of an exploratory site investigation, characterising the site and allowing for potential risks (as identified in phase 1) to be assessed.
3. A scheme of remediation detailing the remedial actions to be taken and how they will be implemented.
On completion of the works set out in (3) a verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming the remediation actions that have been undertaken in accordance with the approved scene of remediation and setting out any measures for maintenance, further monitoring, reporting and arrangements for contingency action. The verification report shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation or operational use of any stage of the development. Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure land contamination risks associated with the site are appropriately investigated and assessed with respect to human health and the wider environment and where required remediation of the site is to an appropriate standard.
15. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use of uncontaminated soils and fill [Pre-Commencement Condition] Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site.
10
REASON: To ensure imported materials are suitable and do not introduce any land contamination risks onto the development.
16. APPROVAL CONDITION- Unsuspected Contamination [Performance Condition]
The site shall be monitored for evidence of unsuspected contamination throughout construction. If potential contamination is encountered that has not previously been identified no further development shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall not recommence until an assessment of the risks presented by the contamination has been undertaken and the details of the findings and any remedial actions has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Any changes to the agreed remediation actions will require the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure any land contamination not previously identified is assessed and remediated so as not to present any significant risks to human health or, the wider environment.
17. APPROVAL CONDITION - Ecological Mitigation Statement [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Prior to development commencing, including site clearance, the developer shall submit a programme of habitat and species mitigation and enhancement measures, [as set out in the submitted Ecology Report] which shall be implemented in accordance with a timetable to be agreed by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason To safeguard protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in the interests of preserving and enhancing biodiversity.
18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Landscaping detailed plan [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Before the commencement of any site works a detailed landscaping scheme and implementation timetable, which clearly indicates the numbers, planting densities, types, planting size and species of trees and shrubs to be planted, means of enclosure, lighting and treatment of hard surfaced areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The landscaping scheme shall specify all trees to be retained and to be lost and shall provide an accurate tree survey with full justification for the retention of trees or their loss. Any trees to be lost shall be replaced on a favourable basis (a two-for one basis unless circumstances dictate otherwise) to ensure a suitable environment is provided on the site.
Any trees, shrubs, seeded or turfed areas which die, fail to establish, are removed or become damaged or diseased, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting shall be replaced by the Developer in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. The Developer shall be responsible for any replacements for a period of 5 years from the date of planting.
11
The approved scheme shall be carried out prior to occupation of the building or during the first planting season following the full completion of building works, whichever is sooner. The approved scheme implemented shall be maintained for a minimum period of 5 years following its complete provision. Reason: To improve the appearance of the site and enhance the character of the development in the interests of visual amenity, to ensure that the development makes a positive contribution to the local environment and, in accordance with the duty required of the Local Planning Authority by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
19. APPROVAL CONDITION – Construction method statement [pre-commencement condition]
Before development commences a statement setting out the management of construction operations shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The statement shall include detailed plans specifying the areas to be used for contractor's vehicle parking and plant; storage of building materials, and any excavated material, huts and all working areas required for the construction of the development hereby permitted. REASON To protect the amenities of neighbours and the wider environment, to ensure adequate access and servicing (including a refuse cart) can be maintained to the existing adjacent housing and ensure that no undue associated congestion occurs on the surrounding roads.
20. APPROVAL CONDITION – Demolition Phasing [pre-commencement condition]
The existing school buildings shall be demolished and all resultant materials shall be removed from the site in accordance with a phasing programme to be agreed in writing with the local planning authority before the development commences. The programme shall include details of continuous access to outdoor space for pupils. REASON To secure a satisfactory comprehensive form of development and to safeguard the visual amenity of the locality.
21. APPROVAL CONDITION – Use of Access [performance condition]
The access shall be upgraded and made available for use in accordance with the agreed details prior to the new school building coming into use and thereafter retained as approved. The existing access from Ullswater Close shall be used by staff only as indicated in the submitted Design and Access Statement. REASON In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the neighbouring residential occupiers
22. APPROVAL CONDITION – Foul and surface water disposal [pre-commencement condition] Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, details of the means of foul sewerage disposal and surface water disposal shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for agreement in writing. The development shall proceed in accordance with the agreed details.
Reason To secure a satisfactory form of development
12
23. APPROVAL CONDITION - CCTV system [performance condition]
Before the new academy building is first occupied details of a scheme for a CCTV system to comprehensively cover the site including all public entry points and car parks shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be installed and operational prior to the first occupation of the approved buildings first commencing and shall thereafter be maintained in working order. REASON In the interests of crime reduction and customer/staff safety.
24. APPROVAL CONDITION – Access Details [pre-commencement condition]
No development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the Local Planning Authority has approved in writing:-
(i) A specification for the type of construction proposed for the new access roads including all relevant horizontal cross-sections and longitudinal sections showing existing and proposed levels together with details of street lighting and the method of disposing of surface water. (ii) A programme for the making up of the roads and footpaths.
REASON: To ensure the access is constructed to a satisfactory standard.
25. APPROVAL CONDITION- No other points of access [performance condition] No points of access to the site other than those hereby approved shall be formed unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON In the interests of the amenities of the neighbouring residential occupiers and in the interests of crime prevention.
26. APPROVAL CONDITION - Refuse & Recycling Bin Storage [pre-commencement condition] Notwithstanding the information already submitted, details of the elevations of a secure and undercover store for refuse and recycling with a level access shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved. The details shall include details of ventilation, drainage and lighting. The store shall be provided as approved before the new building first comes into use and thereafter retained as approved. REASON: In the interests of the visual appearance of the building and the area in general.
27. APPROVAL CONDITION – Travel Plan [pre-commencement condition]
Prior to the commencement of development a sustainable travel plan shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing, detailing how sustainable travel to and from the development hereby approved will be promoted. The development shall proceed in accordance with the agreed travel plan. REASON To promote sustainable forms of transport
13
28. APPROVAL CONDITION - Delivery times [Pre-Occupation Condition]
No deliveries shall be taken in or dispatched from the site during construction or the servicing of the biomass boiler, between the hours of 08:30 and 09:30 and after 15:00, Mondays to Fridays. REASON: To avoid traffic congestion during rush hour times, having regard to the site’s proximity to a school.
29. APPROVAL CONDITION - Parking and Access [performance condition]
The access and parking areas hereby approved shall be provided and made available for use prior to the new school building first coming into occupation and thereafter retained as approved.
REASON To secure a satisfactory form of development.
30. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.
REASON: In the interests of highway safety.
31. APPROVAL CONDITION - External Lighting/No Floodlighting to MUGA [performance condition]
Prior to the commencement of development, full details of the external lighting shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. The lighting shall be installed as approved before the new school building first comes into occupation. For the avoidance of doubt, to floodlighting to the school playing fields, multi-use games area or other open areas shall be installed without the specific granting of a planning permission for such works.
REASON For the avoidance of doubt and to control and assess the impact of such works on the amenities of local residents.
32. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use restriction of the MUGA court [performance condition]
The MUGA court hereby approved shall not be used outside the following hours:-
Monday-Friday 09:00-19:00 hours Saturdays and Sundays 10.00-16.00 hours
REASON To protect the amenities of occupants of nearby residential properties.
14
33. APPROVAL CONDITION - Drainage for food preparation [performance condition] Prior to the new school building first coming into use, grease interceptors shall be installed to the drainage serving food preparation and dish-washing areas. The interceptors shall thereafter be retained. REASON To ensure a satisfactory form of development
34. APPROVAL CONDITION - Phasing of development [pre-commencement condition] The development hereby approved shall proceed in accordance with a construction phasing plan to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to development works commencing. REASON To ensure the site remains in continuous education use
35. APPROVAL CONDITION - Cycle parking [Pre-Occupation Condition] Prior to the first occupation of the development details and plans of the covered, enclosed and secure bicycle parking compound (including elevational and material details) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be occupied until provision has been made within the site in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority after consultation with the Local Highway Authority for the parking of bicycles and the storage of associated ancillary equipment clear of the public highway and such space shall not thereafter be used other than for the purposes for which it is provided. REASON: To accord with sustainable transport policy aimed at providing a choice of travel mode available for the staff of the premises by enabling adequate provision of a facility which is likely to reduce the amount of vehicular traffic on existing roads.
Note to Applicant
1. Southern Water – Public Sewerage - Informative A formal application for connection to the public sewerage is required in order to service this development. Please contact Atkins Ltd, Angle St James House, 39a Southgate Street, Winchester So23 9EH (tel. 01962 858688) or www.southernwater.co.uk
2. Note to Applicant – Pre-Commencement Conditions Your attention is drawn to the pre-commencement conditions above which require the full terms of the condition to be satisfied before development commences. In order to discharge these conditions you are advised that a formal application for condition discharge is required. You should allow approximately 8 weeks, following validation, for a decision to be made on such an application. It is important that you note that if development commences in without the condition having been formally discharged by the Council in writing, any development taking place will be unauthorised in planning terms, invalidating the Planning Permission issued. Furthermore this may result in the Council taking enforcement action against the unauthorised development. If you are in any doubt please contact the Council’s Development Control Service.
3. Note to Applicant – Performance Conditions Your attention is drawn to the performance conditions above which relate to the development approved in perpetuity. Such conditions are designed to run for the whole life of the development and are therefore not suitable to be sought for discharge. If you are in any doubt please contact the Council’s Development Control Service.
15
Application 10/00933/R3CFL APPENDIX 1
Relevant Planning Policies
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS11 An Educated City CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change CS21 Protecting and Enhancing Open Space CS22 Promoting Biodiversity and Protecting Habitats CS25 The Delivery of Infrastructure and Developer Contributions
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP7 Urban Design Context SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP12 Landscape & Biodiversity SDP13 Resource Conservation SDP15 Air Quality SDP16 Noise SDP17 Lighting REI10 Industry and Warehousing NE3 Sites of Local Nature Conservation Importance NE4 Protected Species CLT3 Protection of Open Spaces
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPG13 Transport (2001) PPG17 Planning for Open Space, Sport & Recreation (2002) PPS23 Planning & Pollution Control (2004) PPG24 Planning & Noise (1994)
16
Application 10/00933/R3CFL APPENDIX 2
Relevant Planning History
901505/WH Conditionally Approve 15.01.91 Erection of a single-storey temporary classroom unit
921213/WH Conditionally Approve 11.12.92 Replacement two classrooms
941412/WH Conditionally Approved 02.03.95 Retention of single temporary classroom unit
951180/WH Conditionally Approved 04.12.95 Continued siting of one single temporary classroom unit
960729/WH Conditionally Approved 02.10.96 Retention of single temporary classroom unit
00/00689/R3CFL Conditionally Approved 11.08.00 Erection of two steel masts, 8m high to support CCTV cameras
03/00912/FUL Conditionally Approved 18.0803 Construction of two storey building to comprise of health and family centre with associated car parking and landscaping and the erection of a 6m high column with a CCTV camera at the top.
06/00344/FUL Conditionally Approved 24.08.06 Erection of a thermal sub-station building and associated alterations in connection with a proposed District Heating System for the Millbrook area.
17
18 Agenda Item 13 Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26 th October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address: 20 - 26 College Street And 29 - 35 Richmond Street, Southampton Proposed development: Minor material amendment sought to consent 06/00246/FUL - (Redevelopment of the site to provide 90 flats (45 x one-bedroom and 45 x two-bedroom flats), 1220 square metres of commercial floorspace within buildings ranging in height from 6 to 8 storeys and 43 car parking spaces with vehicular access from Richmond Street and College Street) - to alter development mix on 1st floor, putting 7No. flats (2x1-bed and 5x2-bed) in place of 488 square metres of class B1 office floor space. Application 10/00521/MMA Application type MMA number Case officer Stephen Harrison Public speaking 15 minutes time Last date for 24/06/2010 OUT OF Ward Bargate determination: TIME Reason for Panel To seek the Panel’s Ward Councillors Cllr S Bogle Referral approval to remove Cllr P Damani the previously agreed Cllr Amy Willacy affordable housing contribution following the submission by the applicant of an Economic Viability Appraisal of the approved scheme.
Applicant : Crest Nicholson (South East) Ltd Agent: Mr Julian Goodban (GL Hearn)
Recommendation Delegate to Planning and Development Manager to grant Summary planning permission subject to the revised criteria listed in report
Reason for Granting a Minor Material Amendment (MMA) to Permission 06/00246/FUL The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Although the proposed development does not accord with policy REI11 (vi), particular account has been taken of the quality of the proposed replacement employment floorspace, current market conditions and the overall viability of the scheme. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, a Minor Material Amendment to Permission 06/00246/FUL should therefore be granted. City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP6, SDP7, SDP8, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP16, SDP17, SDP19, SDP22, HE1, HE6, CLT5, CLT6, H1, H2, H7, H9, REI11 (vi) and MSA1 City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010) Policies – CS1, CS4, CS5, CS6, CS7, CS8, CS13, CS14, CS15, CS16, CS18, CS19, CS20, CS22, CS23 and CS25.
Appendix attached 1 June 2010 P&RoW Panel Report 2 June 2010 P&RoW Panel Minutes
1 1.0 Background
1.1 This application site has a long and complicated planning history, as set out below. In summary, there is an extant full planning permission for the redevelopment of the site for 90 flats with ground floor commercial (LPA ref: 06/00246/FUL).
1.2 At the June 2010 Planning Panel the applicants request to make a material alteration to the mix and arrangement of the approved development was agreed, with an additional 7 flats agreed (97 flats in total) following the removal of 488sq.m of commercial (LPA ref: 10/00521/MMA). A copy of the previous Panel report is attached to this report at Appendix 1 . A copy of the agreed Panel Minute is attached to this report at Appendix 2 .
1.3 As part of finalising the S.106 legal agreement for the scheme it has become evident that, despite the increase in units, the scheme is no longer viable given the current economic market. The S.106 has not, therefore, been completed and planning permission 10/00521/MMA has not been issued. Instead, the applicants have submitted a confidential “open book” market appraisal of the scheme that the Panel resolved to grant in June 2010. It suggests that the scheme will only be viable in the current economic climate if the Council’s affordable housing requirement of 24 on-site units is removed.
1.4 The agreement of the Panel is required to this requested change before planning permission can be issued.
1.5 Whilst officers are reluctantly agreeable to the proposal, at the time of writing an agreed mechanism for agreeing this change has not be finalised with the applicant and a verbal update will be given at the meeting.
Recommendation in Full As agreed by Panel in June 2010 with the exception of iii) below:
Delegate the authority to the Head of Planning & Sustainability to grant planning permission, subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 planning agreement secure:- i) a financial contribution towards the provision of public open space in accordance with policy CLT5 and IMP1 of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan and applicable SPG; ii) a financial contribution towards the provision of a new children’s play area and equipment in accordance with policy CLT6 and IMP1 the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan and applicable SPG; iii) provision of affordable housing in accordance with appropriate SPG – unless a mechanism for agreeing the delivery of the scheme in the current market conditions can be found with any uplift in revenue being ring fenced for a financial contribution towards affordable housing elsewhere in the City in accordance with LDF Core Strategy Policy CS15;
Note: A verbal update on this clause will be provided at the Panel meeting once it has been agreed in writing with the applicant. iv) site specific transport obligation for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in accordance with appropriate SPG to encourage sustainability in travel through the use of alternative modes of transport to the private car; v) adherence to the previously submitted Travel Plan; vi) details outlining a waste management scheme for the flats; 2 vii) dedication of land to public use to enable widening of footways and an undertaking to enter into Section 278 Agreement; viii) a financial contribution towards strategic transport contributions for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG; ix) a financial contribution towards public realm improvements in accordance with policy; x) a financial contribution to the provision of Public Art in accordance with policy; xi) obligations relating to water, energy and waste management conservation measures to achieve a minimum of Code Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes for all 97 flats within the development, to comply with policy SDP13 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS20 of the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010); xii) an undertaking to ensure that the commercial units are completed (shell and core finish) before first habitation of the flats; xiii) a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer; and xiv) the submission, agreement and implementation of a flood risk management plan. that the Planning and Development manager be authorised to refuse permission should the Section 106 Agreement not be completed within 2 months from the date of this Panel on the grounds of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Agreement.
2.0 The Site and its Context
2.1 As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers).
3.0 Proposal
3.1 As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers). The reason for reporting the application to Panel again is to seek agreement that the permission can be issued with nil affordable housing.
4.0 Relevant Planning Policy
4.1 As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers) with the exclusion of the South East Plan which has recently been revoked. The main policy issue in relation to the proposed change is LDF Core Strategy Policy CS15 (Affordable Housing). It states that:
“On housing sites where 15 or more net dwellings are proposed, or which exceed 0.5 hectares in size (irrespective of the number of dwellings), the Council will seek provision, through negotiation, of 35% affordable housing.
The proportion of affordable housing to be provided by a particular site will take into account:
1. The costs relating to the development; in particular the financial viability of developing the site (using an approved viability model) 2. The need to contribute towards the sub-regional target whereby the total provision of affordable housing is made up of 65% social rented and 35% intermediate affordable housing 3. The proximity of local services and the accessibility of the site to public transport 4. Constraints on the development of the site imposed by other planning objectives 3 5. The need to achieve a successful housing development in terms of the location and mix of affordable homes…”
5.0 Relevant Planning History
5.1 As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers).
6.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
6.1 As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers) with the following additions:
6.2 SCC Housing Solutions – Accept the findings of the submitted economic appraisal and raise no objection to nil affordable housing provision as part of the current scheme. The development should be completed as soon as possible to reflect the current economic viability with any uplift in sales being ring fenced for a financial contribution towards affordable housing elsewhere in the City.
6.3 Environment Agency – Objection removed. It is clear from the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) that the applicant has explored options for improving safe access and egress during times of flooding and made improvements to the extant permitted development to limit the damage caused by such a flood. An additional planning condition is recommended to secure compliance with the FRA.
7.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
7.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application for a Minor Material Amendment are: i) Principle of Development & Flooding; and, ii) Viability & Affordable Housing
7.2 Principle of Development & Flooding
7.2.1 As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers). At the June Planning Panel delegated authority was granted to resolve the holding objection from the Environment Agency (the EA) prior to the grant of planning permission. The EA have now reviewed the applicant’s Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and raise no objection to the proposal subject to the attached condition that requires the development to be implemented in accordance with the FRA. The principle of development is acceptable.
7.3 Viability & Affordable Housing
7.3.1 In order to satisfy Policy CS15 (as set out above) it has previously been agreed that the affordable housing requirements of this scheme should be met with an on-site provision of 24 flats (comprising 12 no.1 bed and 12 no.2 bed).
7.3.2 Following approval by the June 2010 Planning Panel the current planning application for a minor material amendment is supported by an up-to-date viability appraisal of the proposal, which concludes that this contribution makes the delivery of the scheme non-viable on a commercial basis. No contribution towards affordable housing is, therefore, offered by the applicants to support the application.
4 7.3.3 The applicant’s submitted appraisal has been independently tested. It is recommended by officers that the Council should accept that the previously agreed affordable housing requirement currently makes the scheme non-viable.
7.3.4 A scheme’s viability, and the delivery of affordable housing, are both material considerations where they are directly linked to housing delivery (Policy CS15(1) refers).
7.3.5 However, the key to the determination of this application is to ensure the continued housing delivery despite the current market situation. The Council can assist by taking a flexible approach to its S.106 requirements. The Council needs to be satisfied that the housing delivery will be forthcoming on this City Centre site and should note that the usual 3 year permission may not achieve this. If 3 year permissions are granted during the current economic climate (or are capable of being kept alive for far longer periods by implementing the permission and then mothballing the development until the viability improves) without the provision of affordable housing, then the Local Plan objective of providing a good supply of affordable housing could be cumulatively frustrated and the scheme will no longer reflect the day that the economic appraisal was assessed and the obligation waived.
7.3.6 In deciding whether or not to grant permission other material considerations have to be taken into account, such as the need to secure continued housing delivery (thus providing homes and jobs) and the current need for affordable housing. It is the need to secure housing delivery during recessionary times that would enable the Council to grant permission without an affordable housing contribution, on the basis that it could be satisfied that the units of accommodation would be delivered within a given timescale. As the submitted viability appraisal is a “snapshot” of current market conditions the development needs to be implemented and delivered earlier than would otherwise be the case so as to reflect the applicant’s current market assumptions.
7.3.7 As such, officers recommend that if the developer isn’t able to deliver the units within a shorter timescale to reflect their current market conditions, then it is proper to look to see whether or not the economics of the development may permit a contribution towards affordable housing in the future. The consequence of this approach is that the development would be achieving both the aim of delivering housing whilst also meeting the need to contribute towards the provision of affordable housing. At the time of writing it is recommended that the S.106 Legal Agreement includes a clause (as set out at iii above) that ensures the scheme is realised (provisionally within 24 months – yet to be agreed with the applicant). A revised appraisal should be submitted if this is not possible when an off- site affordable housing contribution may then be viable. In addition, any uplift in the assumed revenues of the flats should be ring-fenced for an affordable housing contribution.
7.3.8 At the time of writing the exact mechanism for securing the delivery of the scheme, and the suggested uplift in value, has not been agreed with the applicant. A verbal update of the agreed position will be given at the Panel meeting.
8.0 Summary
8.1 The proposed development makes efficient use of the application site whilst minimising the impact on the neighbouring properties and the surrounding area. The proposed changes to the scheme have previously been agreed as minor without causing material harm. The introduction of a viability issue has proven that a scheme with 24 on- site affordable units is not currently viable, and this has been independently checked and ratified. Subject to an agreed form of wording within the S.106 legal agreement to secure 5 appropriate mechanisms for securing the delivery of the project, the proposal adheres to the Development Plan policies identified including Core Strategy Policy CS15(1).
9.0 Conclusion
9.1 This application has been assessed as being acceptable to residential amenity and its local context. The application is recommended for conditional approval subject to a revised S.106 legal agreement being completed.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2 (c), 2 (d), 2 (e), 4(s), 5 (e), 6(a), 6(c), 6 (f), 6(h), 7 (a), 7(c), 7 (d), 7 (m), 7 (q), 7 (x), 7 (y), 8(a), 9(a) and 9(b)
SH for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
PLANNING CONDITIONS
As set out in the attached report to the Planning Panel in June 2010 ( Appendix 1 refers) with the addition of the following:
41. APPROVAL CONDITION - Full Permission Timing Condition - physical works The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
42. APPROVAL CONDITION – Flood Risk Assessment The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) Ref: 247178/001 (July 2010), by Peter Brett Associates LLP and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA, namely: • Identification and provision of safe route(s) into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven; • Flood proofing measures detailed on page 14, that service ducts will be sealed from flood waters, electrical plant (ie. the back up generator) will be raised above or sealed from flood waters and electrical sockets will be fitted above flood waters, up to 0.5% tidal event for 2115 in the proposed development; and • Finished floor level of the residential units are set no lower than 6.85 metres above Ordnance Datum (AOD).
Reason: To reduce the risk to the development’s users should they need to access and aggress from and to the site during/prior to a flood. To reduce the impact/risk of flooding on the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with the Environment Agency’s response dated 31 st August 2010 to the planning application.
6
7 This page is intentionally left blank
Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 22 June 2010 Appendix 1 Planning Application Report of the Head of Division
Application address 20 - 26 College Street And 29 - 35 Richmond Street Proposed Minor material amendment sought to consent 06/00246/FUL - development: (Redevelopment of the site to provide 90 flats (45 x one-bedroom and 45 x two-bedroom flats), 1220 square metres of commercial floorspace within buildings ranging in height from 6 to 8 storeys and 43 car parking spaces with vehicular access from Richmond Street and College Street) - to alter development mix on 1st floor, putting 7No. flats (2x1-bed and 5x2-bed) in place of 488 square metres of class B1 office floor space. Application number 10/00581/MMA Application type Full Detailed Case officer Steve Lawrence Application category Q13 - Minor Dwellings
Recommendation Delegate to the Head of Planning & Sustainability to grant Summary planning permission subject to criteria listed in report.
Reason for Panel Departure also requiring completion of legal agreement under consideration Section 106 of the 1990 Act
Applicant: Agent: Crest Nicholson (South East) Ltd Mr Julian Goodban GL Hearn
Date of receipt 29/04/2010 City Ward Bargate Date of registration 29/04/2010 Cllr P Damani Publicity expiry date 8.07.2010 Ward members Cllr A V Willacy Date to determine by 24/06/2010 OUT OF Cllr S Bogle TIME
Site area 488 sq.m B1 Usable private shown: 0m2, albeit approved (overall balcony area access to two site 0.23 ha) separate (total Site coverage 100% 813m2) communal (developed area) internal amenity Density - whole site 421 d.p.h (overall, decks 8.4m2 per unit 391 as approved) overall (compared to 9m2 as approved, albeit 70 approved units also enjoy balconies).
Residential mix nos size sqm Other land uses class size sqm Studio / 1-bedroom 2 47 sq.m Commercial use - - 2-bedroom 5 57 – 75sq.m Retail use - - Policy designation - Class B1 allocation under LPR Policy REI 11 (vi)
Accessibility zone Band 6 Policy parking max 43 spaces (as approved) Parking Permit Zone no existing site parking 0 spaces Cyclist facilities yes car parking provision As approved motor & bicycles 7 cycles disabled parking As approved
1
Key submitted documents supporting application 1 Agent’s letter 2 Viability Statement
Appendix attached 1 Relevant Planning Policy
Recommendation in full
Delegate the authority to the Head of Planning & Sustainability to grant planning permission, subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 planning agreement secure:-
(i) A financial contribution towards the provision of public open space in accordance with policy CLT5 & IMP1 of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan and applicable SPG; (ii) A financial contribution towards the provision of a new children’s play area and equipment in accordance with policy CLT6 & IMP1 the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan and applicable SPG; (iii) Provision of affordable housing in accordance with appropriate SPG; (iv) A financial contribution towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvement in the vicinity of the site in accordance with appropriate SPG to encourage sustainability in travel through the use of alternative modes of transport to the private car; (v) Adherence to the previously submitted Travel Plan; (vi) Details outlining a waste management scheme for the flats; (vii) Dedication of land to public use to enable widening of footways and an undertaking to enter into Section 278 Agreement; (viii) A financial contribution towards strategic transport contributions for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG; (ix) A financial contribution towards public realm improvements in accordance with policy; (x) A financial contribution to the provision of Public Art in accordance with policy; (xi) Obligations relating to resource conservation measures to comply with policy SDP13 of the Local Plan; (xii) An undertaking to ensure that the commercial units are completed (shell and core finish) before first habitation of the flats; (xiii) A highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer.
2
or
That in the event that the legal agreement is not been completed by 9 July 2010 that the Head of Planning & Sustainability be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Agreement.
BACKGROUND
On 24 April 2006, under reference 06/00246/FUL, the Planning and Rights of Way Panel delegated authority to the Development Control Manager to grant planning permission, subject to signing a S.106 legal agreement to secure various matters, for:-
Demolition of the existing buildings. Redevelopment of the site to provide 90 flats (45 x one-bedroom and 45 x two-bedroom flats), 1220 square metres of commercial floorspace within buildings ranging in height from 6 to 8 storeys and 43 car parking spaces with vehicular access from Richmond Street and College Street.
The S.106 was signed and a decision notice was issued. Upon the submission of further details, planning conditions were largely discharged/approved (subject to implementation) by the local planning authority in a letter dated 8 August 2008.
Existing buildings on site were then demolished and access and some drainage works associated with the approved development were commenced. A deed of variation to the S.106 was signed on 6 July 2009. This effectively altered the trigger for payment of the agreed contributions from commencement to first occupation.
Notwithstanding that, the owners/applicant has found difficulty in the current recession to implement this mixed use scheme. Two meetings have taken place with officers to explore whether the mix and precise configuration of the scheme might be altered to allow implementation.
The Government has recently introduced a new type of planning application, whereby a Minor Material Amendment might be sought to a consent already granted. The Regulations and guidance make it clear that this can also relate to the terms of any previously imposed planning condition.
It is also clear that if a Local Planning Authority is minded to support such an application, the decision it issues amounts to issuing a fresh planning permission in law.
One key aspect here relates to the mix of the development. The applicant has carried out an assessment regarding the viability of providing B1 office floor space at this site. It concludes that the scheme would be unviable if the current mix was implemented and office space on the first floor would not be likely to be occupied.
7 further dwellings in place of 488m 2 of office space are therefore proposed instead of the approved mix for the first floor.
3
Site and surrounding context The 0.23 hectare cleared, but overgrown application site, now surrounded by hoarding, was once occupied by three commercial buildings.
The area is characterised by a mix of residential and commercial buildings. The site is framed by a cluster of tall buildings. Mercury Point located to the north of the site is 17 storeys high and Richmond House, which is two buildings along, is 7 storeys high rising to 13 storeys. Oxford House, the abutting property, is two storeys high.
The site is on a prominent corner and is visible from the Oxford Street Conservation Area, whose boundary finishes on the south side of Bernard Street.
There is a large Council owned surface level car park between the application site and Bernard Street. That itself has been the subject of a feasibility exercise by the Council who commissioned Savills to prepare a development Brief. That Brief has yet to be formally adopted, but does include the option of a wider scheme encompassing the application site, Oxford House and Richmond House, should owners of those sites wish to collaborate with the council.
The site itself lies within an area designated for light industry and research and development uses under Policy REI 11(vi) within the Local Plan Review.
Proposal
06/00246/FUL was a full application. Approval was given for the construction of a building ranging between 6 and 8 storeys in height. The proposed height along Threefield Lane would be 6 storeys high rising to 8 on the corner with College Street. The height along both College Street and Richmond Street is approved as 6 storeys rising to 8.
90 flats have been approved: 45 each of one-bed and two-bed.
Two storeys of commercial floorspace (1220m 2) have been approved.
The approved development is to be served by 43 car parking spaces accessed via College Street and this area would also be used to house residents’ and office occupiers’ bicycles and refuse storage.
The commercial floor elevations will be formed of brick piers and narrow windows. The residential element of the scheme will comprise mainly of white render and brick work with timber cladding on the top floor and as corner features with a grey wall panelling system framing these elements.
70 of the flats have their own balcony. All have access to two common amenity spaces. The first internally is at third floor level (635m 2). The second, is a rooftop terrace at the sixth floor level (178m2).
The applicant now proposes that all previously approved B1 space on the first floor (essentially the western and southern wings as consented), be instead laid out as 7 additional flats. None of these flats would enjoy a balcony, but would have access to the two common amenity spaces referred to above.
Overall, the B1 space would drop from 1220m 2 to 732m 2, purely located on the ground floor. The applicant has confirmed that the B1 space would enjoy use of 4 of the 43 approved car parking spaces. 4
The applicant has commissioned appropriate professional advice as to a review of market conditions in the city and the availability quantitatively and qualitatively of existing or consented office floor space. For example, the nearby Richmond House is currently 86% vacant, The ‘Carnival’ company having recently relocated to its new office building in West Quay Road. It is concluded that the prospect of a reliable rental income from providing office accommodation on the first floor is not likely and would adversely affect the viability of the entire project.
The applicant is willing to vary the terms of the previous planning agreement to provide an additional unit of affordable housing (i.e. the development would now contribute 24 in total).
Plot 1.06 on the first floor of the approved building as sought to be varied, is identified as the net additional unit of affordable housing. Because of the alteration in the mix of the development, contributions would also need to be adjusted.
Relevant Planning Policy
The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the South East Plan Regional Spatial Strategy (May 2009), the Local Development Framework Core Strategy for Southampton (January 2010) and the “saved” policies from the Local Plan Review for the City of Southampton (March 2006). Those relevant are set out at Appendix 1 .
Given the site’s allocation under REI 11 (vi), the primary consideration is to secure employment generation to assist with the city’s economic health. A mixed use scheme has already been accepted on this site as a departure from that zoning and is compliant with Local Plan Review Policy SDP1 (iii).
The Government’s considerations of achieving affordable housing and the sustainable use of previously developed land are also relevant.
Sustainability Implications
The previous consent sought to secure a package of resource conservation measures through the S.106 agreement. It is recommended that a similar approach is reiterated here.
Relevant planning history
Under 05/00517/FUL permission for:-
Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of this site to provide 110 flats (17 x 1 bed and 93 x 2 bed flats), 743 square metres of commercial floorspace within buildings ranging in height from 6 -11 storeys and 85 car parking spaces with vehicular access from Richmond Street and College Street.
- was refused 20/06/2005 for a number of reasons, the most relevant here being:-
§ Inappropriate commercial floor space in terms of Class B1(b) and B1(c) usage as there was not enough employment generating floor space;
§ The proposal would be an overdevelopment of the site in that it would provide a poor quality living environment for the future occupiers of the residential accommodation in terms of privacy and outlook and the inadequate amount and quality of private and communal amenity space to be made available to the occupiers of the residential accommodation; and 5
§ The proposal does not include sufficient detailed information to determine whether or not flood risk matters have been satisfactorily addressed.
Application 06/00246/FUL was then submitted and successfully addressed the stated reasons for refusal. In particular, 1220m 2 of B1 space was proposed in place of the 743 m 2 previously proposed. Conditional permission was granted 23/06/2006.
It should be noted that PPG25 was in place at the time of determining 06/00246/FUL. PPS 25 has now replaced PPG25.
Under application 10/00208/NMA - Non-material amendments were sought to permission 06/00246/FUL comprising changes to the internal arrangement and external appearance of the approved building and an update of Condition 3 relating to the approved planning drawings. Quantum of Development remains the same – no objection 23.03.2010.
Under application 10/00516/NMA - Non-material amendments were sought to consent 06/00246/FUL including insertion of door at ground floor to north elevation, adjustments to layout and number of commercial units including removal of some stairwells, insertion of lobbies and new storeroom, adjustments to (internal courtyard) south elevation fenestration – no objection 15.6.2010.
Members may wish to be aware that outline planning permission has just been refused under delegated powers at the abutting Oxford House site for:-
Redevelopment of the site. Erection of a part 9-storey and part 12-storey building to provide 63 flats (30 x one bedroom and 33 x two bedroom flats) and 1,138 square metres of office floor space (Class B1) with associated access and parking (Outline application with access, layout and scale for consideration at this stage).
- on 10/05/2010. In summary, the local planning authority’s reasoning includes:-
§ Impact on the character of the area from a further tall building;
§ Harm to residential amenity of those who come to occupy the consented development to the west (06/00246/FUL), restricted outlook from habitable room windows, inadequate useable amenity space, poor access via an undercroft car park and an adverse impact on the development potential of adjoining sites.
§ Flood risk
§ Mix of accommodation, in particular failing to incorporate any units being capable of occupied as family housing.
§ Loss of community-based health care facility
§ Failure to secure Section 106 matters.
Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was undertaken which included consulting Planning Policy, Housing Services. Pollution and Safety Team and the Environment Agency.
A press advertisement has belatedly been arranged, even though the proposals still represent a departure from the Development Plan and this aspect of the development has 6 previously been advertised under application 06/00246/FUL. Any favourable decision would not, however, need to be referred to GoSE.
Summary of Consultation comments
Environment Agency
Under application 06/00246/FUL the EA had commented that as there will be no sleeping accommodation on the ground floor level of the proposed development and as the finished level is above the risk zone (3.45 AOD) as set out in (then) Flood Risk Assessment. No increased risk to people and property was concluded at that time.
Any views received from the EA will be reported at the meeting.
Housing Services
No objection raised, subject to the additional unit of affordable housing being secured through a planning legal agreement.
Planning Consideration Key Issues
The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: i. The principle of altering the approved mix of development, given the site’s allocation purely for B1 purposes; ii. Flood risk; iii. Design, density & impact on established character; iv. Residential amenity; v. Highways and parking.
The principle of development
The Core Strategy includes a target for 322,000 sq m of new office space, to help promote economic growth in the city centre. Whilst there are a range of potential sites to meet this target, many are longer term options which require further investigation.
It is considered that the reduced office space is realistic and appropriate given the current circumstances of this particular case. This is due to the combination of a number of factors:
§ The difference in absolute terms is relatively small § The secondary nature of the area in office terms § The scheme still provides new office floorspace, and provides a higher density solution relative to the previous use of the site, so the number of jobs generated are still likely to be broadly equivalent to using the whole site for light industry or warehousing, and in addition the scheme will provide residential units. § The unsuccessful marketing of the scheme (e.g. no interest expressed) § Current circumstances (e.g. the recent recession and the significant increase in vacant offices).
Redevelopment for solely light industrial use is unlikely to be viable, therefore a mixed use including offices on the ground floor street frontage is considered acceptable for this city centre site.
7
Although the proposal is still a departure from the adopted plan and in fact results in less B1 space (732 m2) compared to that refused under 05/00517/FUL (743m 2), the proposed alternative scheme is acceptable given current market conditions and the applicant’s assessment of overall viability.
The proposed remaining B1 floorspace will attract companies due to the site’s accessible location and would still intensify the employment potential of the site in line with the adopted policy, over and above that previously provided by the warehouses that once occupied the site.
There is a justifiable case that a departure from adopted policy would be beneficial and acceptable. This justification is supported by the Council's policy team.
Due to the type of development proposed in terms of its location above commercial units and its city centre position the development is not suitable for family size accommodation and the threshold for Policy CS16 I in any case 10 new dwellings.
Flood risk
The application site currently sits astride Flood Zones 2 and 3a as notified by the Environment Agency, albeit by the year 2115 all but the last 200m west part of the site could be within flood zone 3a. The topographic survey undertaken for 06/00246/FUL records surrounding ground levels at between 2.9-3.9m AOD, rising to the west.
The previous flood risk assessment for 06/00246/FUL modelled that a 1:200 year flood event would impact the site to 2.7m AOD. Parts of the ground floor could be impacted to a shallow depth, but that escape routes to the north and west would not be impacted up to the year 2060.
A further 7 flats are proposed, over and above the consented scheme. None would be a ground floor, but would non-the-less contain sleeping accommodation in a flood risk zone.
A new flood risk assessment has been submitted with the current application. The scheme has been remodelled using year 2115 flood levels, assuming a 100 year lifespan for the new building. Using the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) prepared by Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (June 2008), a 1:200 flood level of 4.2m AOD is predicted. The approved first floor accommodation is 6.85m AOD.
The amended scheme now also proposes to incorporate flood resistant/resilient measures to provide a defence up to the projected year 2115, 1:200 flood event level. Such measures will include the removal/sealing of ground level vents (use of ‘Independent Flood Defence Products’ Ventguard, Ventseal and Smartbrick are currently being considered) and having anti-flood valves fitted to all drainage runs existing the building.
The applicant’s consultant has also recommended the Government advice of ‘Improving the flood performance on new buildings – flood resistant construction’ is followed, where the new building might include:-
§ Sealed service ducts § Electrical and other plant being located at a raised level § High level electrical sockets § Optimising the security of supplies
8
Whereas a more detailed SFRA is being prepared for Southampton, this is unlikely to be made available before late July 2010.
The safe access arrangements intended for the additional 7 dwellings beyond the year 2060 are:-
§ Provision of trained flod wardens on th site § The applicant signing-up to the EA flood warning direct service § Preparation of a flood risk management plan for the whole development § Provision of a safe refuge – the internal amenity deck at 3 rd floor level, to disseminate information if a flood event occurred.
The intended strategy for the management plan above is to arrange evacuation prior to the flood event occurring, by giving advance warning of such events, so as to not place undue reliance on the emergency services. By applying the plan to the whole development, the applicant agues a betterment on the existing consented arrangements.
The approach set out in PPS25 is to first seek to develop sites for new housing in Flood Zone 1 (i.e. no risk of flood) and to develop sites in Flood Zone 3 last and only then where certain criteria are met.
Local planning authorities should apply the sequential approach as part of the identification of land for development in areas at risk of flooding.
If there is no reasonably available site in Flood Zone 1, the flood vulnerability of the proposed development (see Table D.2, Annex D) can be taken into account in locating development in Flood Zone 2 and then Flood Zone 3. Within each Flood Zone new development should be directed to sites at the lowest probability of flooding from all sources .
If, following application of the Sequential Test in Annex D, it is not possible, consistent with wider sustainability objectives, for the development to be located in zones of lower probability of flooding, the Exception Test can be applied. It is only appropriate for use when there are large areas in Flood Zones 2 and 3, where the Sequential Test alone cannot deliver acceptable sites, but where some continuing development is necessary for wider sustainable development reasons, taking into account the need to avoid social or economic blight.
Only when sites are not reasonably available to a developer should flood zone 3 be considered and development only entertained if a number of criteria have been met. All the three elements (see para. D.9, Annex D) of the test will have to be passed for development to be permitted. For the Exception Test to be passed: a) it must be demonstrated that the development provides wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk, informed by a strategic flood risk assessment where one has been prepared. The benefits of the development should contribute to the Core Strategy’s Sustainability Appraisal; b) the development should be on developable, previously-developed land; and, c) a flood risk assessment must demonstrate that the development will be safe, without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and, where possible, will reduce flood risk overall.
Officers are satisfied that the sequential test has been applied and that there are no other reasonably available sites open to the applicant to locate the proposed development or improve the viability of the consented scheme. Officers are also satisfied that all three 9 elements of the exception test apply in this case. Any further written views from the Environment Agency will be reported at the meeting. Being a statutory consultee under legislation, the Environment Agency does have the power to ask GoSE to call the application in for the Secretary of State’s own determination.
Density, design & impact on established character
The city centre minimum density is 100 dwellings per hectare this alternative scheme’s density is 421 dwellings per hectare (compared to 391 as consented). The density is appropriate when assessing the scheme against other recently approved developments within the vicinity.
In terms of the design aspect of the build, the scale and bulk is identical to that already consented. Therefore, the development still fits harmoniously with the other buildings within the vicinity, including lower level buildings within the conservation area, some distance away to the south.
The proposal provides a justifiable case to approve a departure from the local plan due to the current state of the site and its location. The scheme complies with Central Government’s Guidance on providing high density mixed use developments on brown field sites.
Residential amenity
The original scheme of 110 dwellings was refused for inadequate quality of amenity space and the impact of this amenity on the adjacent flats facing into this plaza area. The main amenity area for the scheme is located on the third floor. There is also a second roof top amenity plaza area on the sixth floor which comprises of shrub planters and sheltered canopies.
The main plaza area consists of raised water features, raised deck areas, raised planters and a BBQ area. This area has been well thought out and has been designed to be linked with the indoors.
Whereas a small reduction in the amount of space available per dwelling would result from the increased density - 8.4m 2 per unit overall (compared to 9m 2 as approved) – this is not considered so detrimental to justify the refusal of planning permission and an additional contribution towards improving public open space locally would result from the S.106.
Highways and Parking
Given the site’s high accessibility location a car free scheme accords with policy SDP5 and CS18/CS19.
Appropriate cycle and refuse storage has been provided for future occupants of the site in accordance with policy SDP5 (Appendix 2) of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review, CS19 of the adopted Core Strategy and paragraphs 5.3 and 9.22 – 9.2.6 of the Residential Design Guide.
Conclusion
This application has been assessed as being acceptable to residential amenity and its local context. The application is recommended for conditional approval subject to a S.106 legal agreement being completed.
10
Corporate Awareness Considerations
The planning assessment made on this planning application proposal has taken into account the relative importance of Council initiatives and corporate aims as considered appropriate to the formulation of the recommendation reached. In particular, the draft development brief prepared for the land to the south of the site would not be compromised by granting planning permission. The recommendation is considered to accord with the wider aims and objectives of the councils agenda.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2 (c), 2 (d), 2 (e), 4(s), 5 (e), 6(a), 6(c), 6 (f), 6(h), 7 (a), 7(c), 7 (d), 7 (m), 7 (q), 7 (x), 7 (y), 8(a), 9(a) and 9(b)
(SL 7/06/2010 for 22/06/2010 PRoW Panel)
RECOMMENDATION: DEL
11
CONDITIONS for 10/00521/MMA
01. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION - Site investigation and remediation
Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following elements unless specifically excluded, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority.
1. A desk study identifying: -all previous uses -potential contaminants associated with those uses -a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors -potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site
2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for an assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.
3. The results of the site investigation and risk assessment (2) and a method statement based on those results giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.
4. A verification report on completion of the works set out in (3) confirming the remediation measures that have been undertaken in accordance with the method statement and setting out measures for maintenance, further monitoring and reporting.
Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the local planning authority.
REASON The site may be contaminated due to industrial activities that have taken place onsite. Risk to groundwater and surface water has not yet been established at the site.
02. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION - Archaeological Works
No development shall take place within the site until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON To ensure that the archaeology of the site is properly investigated.
03. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION - External lighting
A detailed scheme for the lighting of external areas – including the two communal amenity spaces - shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before development commences. The agreed scheme of external lighting shall be fully implemented to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority before any of the dwellings hereby approved are first occupied and subsequently maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
12
REASON In the interests of crime prevention and having regard to the site’s proximity to Southampton Airport in terms of needing to ensure pilot/public safety.
04. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION - Bird hazard management plan
Development shall not begin until a method statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, detailing how the applicant would prevent the nesting, roosting or loafing of hazardous birds, in particular gull on flat/shallow pitched roofs. The method statement shall be implemented as approved.
REASON To avoid endangering the operation of aircraft through the attraction of birds.
05. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION - Foul drainage
No development approved by this planning permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the foul drainage has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. An assessment of the capacity of the existing foul sewer should be carried out to ensure that there is sufficient capacity to deal with any increase in flow and loading associated with this development. It should be demonstrated that there will be no increase in the frequency of surcharges from the foul sewer as a result of the increased flows from this development. We recommend that the applicant consults the sewerage undertaker Southern Water on this assessment.
REASON An increase in the loading to the mains foul sewer may result in increased overflows from the Millbrook sewerage catchment. To protect surface water from pollution the receiving sewer should be of sufficient capacity to avoid these increases.
06. PRE-COMMENCEMENT CONDITION - Surface water drainage
No development approved by this planning permission shall be commenced until details for the surface water drainage have been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such details should include provision for all surface water drainage from parking areas and areas of hardstanding to be passed through an oil separator designed to have the capacity and details compatible with the site being drained. Roof water should not pass through the separator.
REASON To protect surface waters and reduce loading on the foul sewer.
07. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Drainage
No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant risk to controlled waters.
REASON To protect the minor aquifer beneath the site and the surface waters to the south west of the site as SUDS can increase the potential for pollution if located in contaminated ground.
13
08. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Piling restriction
Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods will not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant risk to groundwater.
REASON To protect minor aquifer beneath the site and the surface waters to the south west of the site. If used, piling may provide direct pathways for contaminants to groundwater.
09. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Details and samples of the materials
The materials schedule attached to the HNW letter dated 6 November 2007 shall be used to implement the development hereby approved.
REASON In order that the Local Planning Authority can exercise control over the final appearance of the building in the interests of visual amenity.
10. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Improved daylighting to 3 Courtyard units
The increase in size of the 3 lounge windows in line with the recommendations as set out in submitted ‘daylight and sunlight provision in courtyard flats, College Street’ dated 14th February 2006 and submitted with application 06/00246/FUL, detailed in the HNW letter dated 21 December 2007, shall be fully implemented as part of the development.
REASON In the interests of the future occupiers residential amenities, in order to achieve adequate daylighting.
11. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Office space
The commercial floor space hereby approved shall only be used for B1 uses as defined within the Town and Country Planning Use Classes (Amendment) Order 2005 and there shall be no permitted change to B8.
REASON In order to safeguard the office space and its employment generating potential within this area of Southampton.
12. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Communal amenity spaces
The landscaped communal plaza/rooftop areas shown on the previously approved 06/00246/FUL drawings and pedestrian access to them shall be provided and made available prior to the occupation of any of the flats hereby permitted and shall thereafter be retained at all times for the use of all the occupiers of the flats.
REASON To ensure the provision of amenity space in association with the flats.
14
13. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Design of column locations within the car park
The design of column locations within the car park as previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008, in response to the HNW letter and enclosures dated 22 November 2007, shall be fully implemented as part of implementing the development.
REASON To allow vehicles to manoeuvre into the car park spaces thus preventing vehicles from carrying out multiple manoeuvres when parking, thereby causing congestion and obstruction to traffic on the highway.
14. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Cycle access and exit route
The cycle access and exit route to the car park shown on HNW drawing 07045 P010 Rev P4, previously approved by the Local Planning Authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008, shall be provided and permanently maintained for that purpose.
REASON To maintain pedestrian and cycle safety and access.
15. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Details of the parking, loading, unloading and turning of vehicles
The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the approved details attached to the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 - set out in drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P010 Rev P4, P011 Rev P4 and P012 Rev P4 - for the parking, loading, unloading and turning of vehicles serving the site, have been provided, as previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008. Those measures shall subsequently be retained and reserved for those purposes at all times.
REASON In the interests of highway safety and to achieve a satisfactory form of development.
16. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Routeing of construction traffic and on-site arrangements
During the development those details set out in and attached to the HNW letter dated 16 January 2008 relating to the routeing of construction traffic and on site areas for the parking, loading, unloading and turning of vehicles shall be fully observed, as previously approved in the local planning authority’s letter dated 8 August 2008. Such areas shall be subsequently retained and reserved for those purposes at all times during the construction period.
REASON In the interests of highway safety and to achieve a satisfactory form of development.
17. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Motor cycle parking
Adequate parking facilities for 2 motorcycles to the Local Planning Authority's standards , as previously approved by the local planning authority’s letter dated 8 August 2008 in response to the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 relating to HNW drawing 07045 P011 Rev P4, shall be provided before any part of the development is first brought into use. Such parking shall be permanently maintained for that purpose.
15
REASON To encourage motorcycling as a more sustainable form of transport.
18. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Details of residential bicycle parking
No flat shall first be occupied until secure, covered and enclosed space has been laid out within the site for 97 bicycles to be stored with both wheels on the ground for the benefit of the occupants in accordance with the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 - set out in drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P010 Rev P4, P011 Rev P4 and P012 Rev P4 – previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008. The cycle storage shall thereafter be retained and maintained on site for that purpose.
REASON To encourage cycling as a sustainable form of transport.
19. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Visitor cycle parking
The building shall not be occupied in full or in part until cycle stands for 10 visitors have been made available for visitors to the residential element of the site and cycle stands for 6 visitors have been made available for visitors to the commercial element of the site in accordance with the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 - set out in drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P010 Rev P4 and P011 Rev P4 - previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008. Once provided, those cycle stands shall thereafter be retained on site for that purpose.
REASON To encourage cycling as a sustainable form of transport.
20. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Refuse and waste recycling facilities
The refuse storage arrangements including facilities for recyling, set out in the HNW letter and enclosures dated 21 December 2007 and previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008, shall be fully implemented and provided before any part of the building is first brought into use. Once provided those facilities shall be retained on site for that purpose at all times.
REASON To ensure satisfactory facilities are provided for refuse storage and recyling.
21. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Minimum clearance to undercrofts
The minimum clearance over the access and undercroft shall shall not be less than 2.5m above the carriageway level before the development hereby approved is first brought into use.
REASON To provide maintain access and safety for vehicle users, cyclists and pedestrians.
22. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Gate positioning
Gates shall be set back at least 5.5m from the rear of the footway and shall be shown on a drawing and approved in writing before the development hereby permitted commences and such vehicular egress from the site and shall be provided and permanently maintained for that purpose.
16
REASON To maintain pedestrian and cycle safety and access.
23. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Provision of vehicular sight lines
Sight lines of 2.4m x 35m shown on HNW drawing 07045 P010 Rev P4, previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008, shall be provided before the building is first brought into use. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country General Development Order 1995 (as amended) no fences, walls or other means of enclosure, including hedges and shrubs, or other structures shall be erected above a height of 0.6 metres above carriageway level within the sight line splay.
REASON In the interests of highway safety.
24. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Provision of pedestrian sight lines
Pedestrian sight lines of 2.0m x 2.0m on HNW drawing 07045 P010 Rev P4, previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008, shall be provided before the building is first brought into use. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country General Development Order 1995 (as amended) no fences, walls or other means of enclosure, including hedges and shrubs, or other structures shall be erected above a height of 0.6 metres above carriageway level within the sight line splay.
REASON In the interests of highway safety.
25. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Highways requirement
No doors, windows or other openings are to open out onto the highway.
REASON In the interests of pedestrian safety.
26. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Oversailing licence
A licence for the construction of buildings over highways to comply with S177 of the Highways Act 1980 shall be obtained or the over sail of the highway shall be removed to conform to the Local Planning Authority's requirements (and shall be shown on a drawing and approved in writing) before the development hereby permitted commences.
REASON To maintain pedestrian and cycle safety.
27. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Construction of access
A dropped kerb vehicle access that maintains pedestrian priority shall be provided at the entrance to and exit from the car park and shall be shown on a drawing and approved in writing prior to first occupation of the development. Such access shall be permanently maintained for that purpose.
REASON To maintain pedestrian safety and access.
17
28. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Stop up redundant access
The existing accesses to the site on Richmond Street and College Street which are no longer required shall be stopped up and abandoned and the footway crossings shall be reinstated immediately after the completion of the new access.
REASON In the interests of highway safety.
29. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Provision for the disabled
Adequate disabled facilities to provide suitable access, to all areas of the development that conform to the Local Planning Authority's standards shall be provided within the site before the development hereby permitted commences and such access shall be permanently maintained for that purpose:
REASON To provide suitable access for the disabled.
30. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Vehicular gradient maxima
The gradient of the vehicular access shall be no more than 10% to conform to the Local Planning Authority's requirements. Gradients shown on the HNW drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P028 Rev P3 and P030 Rev P1, as previously approved by the local planning authority in it’s letter dated 8 August 2008, shall be built out before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use.
REASON To provide safe access to the development and to prevent congestion on the highway.
31. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Pedestrian gradient maxima
The gradient of pedestrian access shall be no more than 8% and where possible 5% to conform to the Local Planning Authority's requirements. Gradients shown on the HNW drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P028 Rev P3 and P030 Rev P1, as previously approved by the local planning authority in it’s letter dated 8 August 2008, shall be built out before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use.
REASON To provide safe pedestrian access particularly for the disabled.
32. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Car parking provision/allocation
Adequate parking facilities for 37 cars including a maximum of 4 spaces for the commercial units to conform to the Local Planning Authority's standards shall be provided in accordance with the approved details attached to the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 - set out in drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P010 Rev P4, P011 Rev P4 and P012 Rev P4 – before the building is first brought into use. Such parking shall be permanently maintained for that purpose.
REASON To prevent obstruction to traffic in neighbouring roads.
18
33. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Car parking for the disabled
At least 6 disabled car parking spaces to conform to the Local Planning Authority's standards and the DDA shall be provided in accordance with the approved details attached to the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 - set out in drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P010 Rev P4, P011 Rev P4 and P012 Rev P4 – before the building is first brought into use. Such parking shall be permanently maintained for that purpose.
REASON To provide safe and adequate parking and access facilities for disabled persons.
34. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Car parking
Before any part of the development hereby approved is occupied, both the 43 on-site parking spaces and a proper vehicle access relating to them shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority and thereafter retained for that purpose. The residential element of the parking shall not used for any trade, business or industrial user.
REASON To ensure provision of vehicular access and parking, to avoid congestion in adjoining areas and to protect the amenities of the area.
35. PERFORMANCE CONDTION – Offices: bicycle parking provision
The office accommodation shall not be occupied in full or in part until secure, covered and enclosed space has been laid out within the site for 18 bicycles to be stored with both wheels on the ground for the benefit of the commercial units, independent of any residential bicycle parking. The areas for bicycle parking shall accord with those previously approved by the local planning authority in its letter dated 8 August 2008, relating to details attached to the HNW letter dated 22 November 2007 - set out in drawings prefixed 07045 and numbered P010 Rev P4, P011 Rev P4 and P012 Rev P4. Once provided that bicycle storage shall thereafter be retained and maintained on site for that purpose.
REASON To encourage cycling as a sustainable form of transport.
36. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Acoustic glazing
All windows shall be glazed to the following standard, or other such specification as might be agreed in writing with the local planning authority:- Outer pane of glass - 10mm Air gap between panes - 12mm Inner pane of glass - 6 mm or, with secondary glazing with a - Outer pane of glass - 6mm Air gap between panes - 100mm Inner pane of glass - 6.4 mm
There must be no trickle vents installed in any case. For ventilation purposes in all cases, provision of acoustically treated 'BBA' (http://www.bbacerts.co.uk/) approved mechanically powered ventilation should be the preferred option. However, provision of acoustic trickle vents will be acceptable. Once approved, that glazing shall be installed before any of the flats are first occupied and thereafter retained at all times.
19
REASON To protect occupants of those flats from traffic noise from Threefield Lane.
37. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Clean fill materials
Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site.
REASON To ensure no ground contamination risks to human health and the environment are introduced onto the development.
38. PERFORMANCE CONDITION - Unexpected contamination
If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an addendum to the Method Statement. This addendum to the Method Statement must detail how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.
REASON To protect minor aquifer beneath the site and the surface waters to the south west of the site. There may be areas of the site, which can not be fully characterised by a site investigation and unexpected contamination may be identified.
39. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Wheel Cleaning
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels have been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud being carried onto the highway.
REASON In the interests of highway safety.
40. PERFORMANCE CONDTION - Hours of construction
All works relating to the construction of the development hereby granted, including the works to regrade the levels of the site, demolition and ground preparation prior to building operations shall only take place between the hours of 8am and 6pm on Monday to Friday and 9am to 1pm on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays.
REASON To protect the amenities of occupiers of nearby dwellings during the construction period.
Reason for granting a Minor Material Amendment to Permission 06/00246/FUL
The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Although the proposed development does not accord with policy REI11 (vi), particular account has been taken of the quality of the proposed replacement employment floorspace, current market conditions, the overall viability of the scheme and delivery of more affordable housing. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 20
(6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, a Minor Material Amendment to Permission 06/00246/FUL should therefore be granted.
South East Plan: Regional Spatial Strategy (May 2009)
Policies –
SP2, SP3, SP4, CC1, CC2, CC3, CC4, CC6, CC7, CC8, RE1, RE3, RE6, H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, T1, T2, T4, T5, NRM1, NRM2, NRM4, NRM5, NRM10, W1, W2, BE1, BE6, TC1, TC2, S1, S5, SH1, SH3, SH4, SH5, SH6, SH7 and SH8
City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006)
Policies –
SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP6, SDP7, SDP9, SDP8 , SDP10, SDP 11, SDP 12, SDP 13, SDP 16, SDP17, SDP19, SDP22, HE1, HE6, CLT 5, CLT 6, H1, H2, H7, H9, REI 11 (vi) and MSA1
City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010)
Policies –
CS1, CS4, CS5, CS6, CS7, CS8, CS13, CS14, CS15, CS16, CS18, CS19, CS20, CS22, CS23 and CS25.
Notes to Applicant
1. Please be advised of the British Standard Code of Practice for the safe use of Cranes, for crane operators to consult the aerodrome before erecting a crane in close proximity to an aerodrome. This is explained further in Advice Note 4 ‘Cranes and Other Construction Issues’ available at www.caa.co.uk/srg/aerodrome.
2. Any method statement in respect of a bird hazard management plan must ensure that flat/shallow pitched roofs be constructed to allow access to all areas by foot using permanent fixed access stairs, ladders or similar. The owner/occupier must not allow gulls, to nest, roost or loaf on the building. Checks must be made weekly during the breeding season. Outside of the breeding season gull activity must be monitored and the roof checked regularly to ensure that gulls do not utilise the roof. Any gulls found nesting, roosting or loafing must be dispersed by the owner/occupier when detected or when requested by the BAA Airfield Operations staff. The owner/occupiers must remove any nest or eggs found on the roof. The breeding season for gulls typically runs from March to June. The owner/occupiers must hold appropriate Defra licences before the removal of nests and eggs.
3. A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development. To initiate a sewer capacity check to identify the appropriate connection point for the development, please contact Southern Water’s Network Development Team (Wastewater) based in Otterbourne, Hampshire or www.southernwater.co.uk.
4. A formal application for connection to the water supply is required in order to service this development. Please contact Southern Water’s Network Development Team (Water) based in Chatham, Kent or www.southernwater.co.uk.
21
5. Hampshire Constabulary have advised that communal external door and flat access doorsets should be to BS PAS 23-1 1999/BS PAS 24-1 1999 (Doors of Enhanced Security. It is recommended that CCTV cameras be deployed within the post room to deter criminal intrusion and other critical points such as vehicle entry/exit, pedestrian street entrances and the parking areas. In addition each flats should provide audio/visual control of the communal access doorsets.
22
Application 10/00581/MMA Appendix 1
POLICY CONTEXT
South East Plan: Regional Spatial Strategy (May 2009) SP2 – Regional hubs SP3 – Urban focus and urban renaissance SP4 – Regeneration and social inclusion CC1 – Sustainable development CC2 – Climate change CC3 – Resource use CC4 – Sustainable design and construction CC6 – Sustainable communities and character of the environment CC7 – Infrastructure and implementation CC8 – Green infrastructure RE1 – Contributing to the UK’s long term competitiveness RE3 – Employment and land provision RE6 – Competitiveness and addressing structural economic weakness H1 – Regional housing provision 2006-2026 H2 – Managing the delivery of the regional housing provision H3 – Affordable housing H4 – Type and size of new housing H5 – Housing design and density T1 – Manage and invest (Travel) T2 – Mobility management T4 – Parking T5 – Travel plans and advice NRM1 – Sustainable water resources and groundwater quality NRM2 – Water quality NRM4 – Sustainable flood risk management NRM5 – Conservation and improvement of biodiversity NRM10 – Noise W1 – Waste reduction W2 – Sustainable design, construction and demolition BE1 – Management for an urban renaissance BE6 – Management of the historic environment TC1 – Strategic network of town centres TC2 – New development and redevelopment in town centres S1 – Supporting healthy communities S5 – Cultural and sporting activity SH1 – Core Policy (For South Hampshire) SH3 – Scale, location and type of employment development SH4 – Strategy for main town centres SH5 – Scale and location of housing development 2006-2026 SH6 – Affordable housing SH7 – Sub-regional transport strategy SH8 – Environmental sustainability
City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) SDP1 - Quality of Development SDP4 – Development access SDP5 - Parking SDP6 – Urban design principles SDP 7 - Context SDP8 – Urban Form and Public Space 23
SDP9 – Scale, massing and appearance SDP10 – Safety and security SDP 11 - Accessibility and Movement SDP 12 - Landscape and biodiversity SDP 13 – Resource Conservation SDP 16 – Noise SDP17 – Lighting SDP19 – Aerodrome safeguarding SDP21 – Water quality and drainage SDP22 – Contaminated land HE1 – New Development in and affecting the setting of Conservation Areas HE6 - Archaeology CLT 5 - Open Space in New Residential Developments CLT 6 - Provision of Children’s Play Areas H1 – Housing Supply H2 – Previously Developed Land H7 – Residential Environment H9 – Affordable Housing Requirements REI 11 – Light Industry MSA1 – City Centre Design
City of Southampton Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010) CS1 City centre approach CS4 Housing delivery CS5 Housing Density CS6 Economic growth CS7 Safeguarding employment sites CS8 Office location CS13 Fundamentals of design CS14 Historic environment CS15 Affordable housing CS16 Housing Mix and Type CS18 Transport: Reduce, manage, invest CS19 Car and Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and adapting to climate change CS22 Promoting biodiversity CS23 Flood risk CS25 The delivery of infrastructure and developer contributions
Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Design Guide (September 2006) Planning Obligations (August 2005) Development Design Guide City Centre Urban Design Strategy City Centre Characterisation Study
Other relevant guidance PPS1 – Delivering sustainable development PPS 3 – Housing PPS4 – Planning for sustainable economic growth PPS5 – Planning for the historic environment PPG13 – Transport PPG17 – Planning for open space, sport and recreation PPG24 – Planning and noise PPS25 – Development and flood risk
24
25 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 2
PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 22 JUNE 2010
Present: Councillors Fitzhenry (Except Minute Item 11) (Chair), Jones (Vice- Chair), Letts (Except for Minute Items 13 and 14), Mead, Osmond (Except Minute Items 13 and 14), Slade (Except Minute Items 11, 13, 14 and 15) and Thomas
7. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (INCLUDING MATTERS ARISING) RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 25 th May 2010 be approved and signed as a correct record.
CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS Copy of all reports circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes.
8. 20 - 26 COLLEGE STREET AND 29 - 35 RICHMOND STREET - 10/00581/MMA Minor material amendment sought to consent 06/00246/FUL - (Redevelopment of the site to provide 90 flats (45 x one-bedroom and 45 x two-bedroom flats), 1220 square metres of commercial floorspace within buildings ranging in height from 6 to 8 storeys and 43 car parking spaces with vehicular access from Richmond Street and College Street) - to alter development mix on 1st floor, putting 7 flats (2 x 1-bed and 5 x 2-bed) in place of 488 square metres of class B1 office floor space.
Ms Bourke (Environment Agency) was present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
UPON BEING PUT TO THE VOTE THE AMENDED OFFICER RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT CONDITIONAL PLANNING PERMISSION SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT ENTERING INTO A SECTION 106 LEGAL AGREEMENT WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
RESOLVED
(i) that authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Sustainability to grant conditional planning approval subject to:-
a. the Environment Agency confirming in writing that they have removed their written holding objection relating to flood risk matters; b. the conditions in the report; c. the applicant entering into a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure: 1. a financial contribution towards the provision of public open space in accordance with policy CLT5 and IMP1 of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan and applicable SPG; 2. a financial contribution towards the provision of a new children’s play area and equipment in accordance with policy CLT6 and IMP1 the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan and applicable SPG; 3. provision of affordable housing in accordance with appropriate SPG; 4. site specific transport obligation for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site in accordance with appropriate SPG to encourage sustainability in travel through the use of alternative modes of transport to the private car; 5. adherence to the previously submitted Travel Plan; 6. details outlining a waste management scheme for the flats; 7. dedication of land to public use to enable widening of footways and an undertaking to enter into Section 278 Agreement; 8. a financial contribution towards strategic transport contributions for highway network improvements in the wider area as set out in the Local Transport Plan and appropriate SPG; 9. a financial contribution towards public realm improvements in accordance with policy; 10. a financial contribution to the provision of Public Art in accordance with policy; 11. obligations relating to water, energy and waste management conservation measures to achieve a minimum of Code Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes for all 97 flats within the development, to comply with policy SDP13 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and Policy CS20 of the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010); 12. an undertaking to ensure that the commercial units are completed (shell and core finish) before first habitation of the flats; 13. a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer; and 14. the submission, agreement and implementation of a flood risk management plan. (ii) that the Head of Planning and Sustainability be authorised to refuse permission should the Section 106 Agreement not be completed by 9th July 2010, on the grounds of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Agreement.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan as set out below. Although the proposed development does not accord with policy REI11 (vi), particular account has been taken of the quality of the proposed replacement employment floorspace, current market conditions, the overall viability of the scheme and delivery of more affordable housing. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, a Minor Material Amendment to Permission 06/00246/FUL should therefore be granted. South East Plan: Regional Spatial Strategy (May 2009) Policies – SP2, SP3, SP4, CC1, CC2, CC3, CC4, CC6, CC7, CC8, RE1, RE3, RE6, H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, T1, T2, T4, T5, NRM1, NRM2, NRM4, NRM5, NRM10, W1, W2, BE1, BE6, TC1, TC2, S1, S5, SH1, SH3, SH4, SH5, SH6, SH7 and SH8. City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP6, SDP7, SDP9, SDP8 , SDP10, SDP 11, SDP 12, SDP 13, SDP 16, SDP17, SDP19, SDP22, HE1, HE6, CLT 5, CLT 6, H1, H2, H7, H9, REI 11 (vi) and MSA1. City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010) Policies – CS1, CS4, CS5, CS6, CS7, CS8, CS13, CS14, CS15, CS16, CS18, CS19, CS20, CS22, CS23 and CS25.
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 14 Southampton City Planning & Sustainability Planning and Rights of Way Panel meeting 26th October 2010 Planning Application Report of the Planning and Development Manager
Application address: 187 Upper Deacon Road
Proposed development: Erection of two storey 4-bedroom detached house with cycle store
Application 10/01094/FUL Application type FUL number Case officer Jenna Turner Public speaking time 5 minutes Last date for 18.10.2010 Ward Bitterne determination: Ward Councillors Cllr Fuller Cllr Stevens Cllr Letts
Applicant : Kevin Goodson Agent: Luken Beck
Recommendation Summary Conditionally approve
Reason for Panel Referral To assess the implication of the recent change to PPS3 on this proposal for the development of garden land.
Reason for Granting Permission The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan and other guidance as set out on the attached sheet. Other material considerations do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application for the reasons given in the report to the Planning and Rights of Way Panel on the 26.10.10. Appropriate planning conditions have been imposed to mitigate any harm identified. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning Permission should therefore be granted having account of the following planning policies:
“Saved” Policies – SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9, SDP10, SDP11, SDP12, SDP13, SDP14, H1, and H7 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review - Adopted March 2006 as supported by the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) policies CS4, CS5, CS13, CS19, and CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing 2010) and PPG13 (Transport) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
Appendix attached
1 Development Plan Policies
1
Recommendation in Full
Conditionally approve
1. The site and its context
1.1 The application site comprises an area of residential curtilage to the side of 187 Upper Deacon Road. The site has been fenced off from the existing property and has a separate vehicular access from Upper Deacon Road. The existing property is set back from the front boundary approximately twice as far as the properties which neighbour the site.
1.2 The land slopes from west to east within the street meaning the application site is at a lower level than the neighbour at No. 191 Upper Deacon Road. The area has a suburban character and comprises a mix of detached and semi-detached properties which vary in design.
2. Proposal
2.1 The application proposes the construction of a four-bedroom detached house which is two-storey in scale with accommodation within the roof space served by a rear facing dormer window. The property has a traditional design appearance with a pitched roof and double height bay window to the front elevation. A residential density of 33 dwellings per hectare would be achieved.
2.2 Over 100 sq.m of amenity space would be provided to the rear of the site and the rear garden would be 22 metres in depth. One car parking space would be provided to the front of the site and a purpose built store for two bicycles would be provided within the rear curtilage of the property.
3.0 Relevant Planning Policy
3.1 The Development Plan for Southampton currently comprises the “saved” policies of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and the City of Southampton Core Strategy (January 2010). The most relevant policies to these proposals are set out at Appendix 1 .
3.2 The application site is not allocated in the current development plan. The Council’s usual requirements for achieving context-sensitive residential design as required by Core Strategy policy CS13 and policies SDP1, SDP7 and SDP9 of the Local Plan are applicable. Applications for new residential dwellings are expected to meet high sustainable construction standards in accordance with adopted Core Strategy Policy CS20 and Local Plan “saved” Policy SDP13.
3.3 On June 9th 2010 private residential gardens were excluded from the definition of Previously Developed Land (PDL) in the Government’s Planning Policy Statement on Housing (PPS3). Also, the requirement to achieve a minimum density of at least 30 dwellings per hectare was removed.
3.4 The revised PPS3 maintains that the priority for development should be PDL (Paragraph 36 refers).
2
3.5 The adopted Core Strategy (in Policy CS4 Housing Delivery) indicates that 16,300 additional homes will be provided over the plan period, with 5,750 homes to be provided on allocated and identified sites between April 2009 and March 2014. The figures demonstrate that the city has a housing supply from identified sites sufficient to meet requirements until and beyond 2018/19, without reliance on windfall sites. The change to the definition of PDL, and the Council’s current predicted supply, means that the principle of development will now be an issue for new windfall proposals for housing units to be built entirely on private residential gardens (often termed “garden grab”).
3.6 That said, the revised PPS3 maintains that the planning system should provide “a flexible, responsive supply of land that is managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land, including re-use of previously-developed land, where appropriate” (Paragraph 10 refers). The national annual target that “at least 60 per cent of new housing should be provided on previously developed land” remains, suggesting that residential development can still take place on other land subject to the local circumstances of each site involved.
3.7 It is the view of the Council’s Planning Policy Team that the recent changes to PPS3, along with the removal of the national indicative minimum density standards, are not intended to stop all development on private residential gardens. Instead it allows Councils greater powers to resist such development where there is a demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of an area. The judgement as to whether such proposals are acceptable will need to consider, amongst other factors:
• the loss of private residential garden land; • the contribution the land currently makes to the character of the area; • the impact on the defined character of the area; and, • the contribution that the scheme makes to meeting housing need.
3.8 The revised PPS3 maintains that design which is inappropriate in its context, or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions, should not be accepted (Paragraph 13 refers).
4.0 Relevant Planning History
4.1 There has been one previous application on this site for a garage and bay window extension approved in 1955.
5.0 Consultation Responses and Notification Representations
5.1 Following the receipt of the planning application a publicity exercise in line with department procedures was also undertaken which included notifying adjoining and nearby landowners, and erecting a site notice (23.09.10). At the time of writing the report 0 representations have been received.
5.2 SCC Highways - No objection. Suggests conditions to minimise disruption to the adjacent highway during the construction process.
5.3 SCC Sustainability Team - No objection. Suggests conditions to secure level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes and the incorporation of renewables or low carbon energy sources.
3
5.4 SCC Environmental Health (Pollution & Safety) – No objection. Suggests conditions to minimise disruption to neighbours during the construction process.
5.5 SCC Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) - No objection. The site could be subject to historic land contamination and therefore conditions are suggested to investigate this and to secure any necessary remediation.
5.6 SCC Trees - No objection. Suggests conditions to protect an oak tree which overhangs the site during the construction process.
6.0 Planning Consideration Key Issues
6.1 The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: i. Principle of development; ii. Design; iii. Residential amenity; iv. Residential Standards; and v. Highways and parking.
6.2 Principle of Development
6.2.1 The proposal would involve the development of garden land which has been recently removed from the definition of ‘previously developed land’. PPS3 indicates that the priority for development is still previously developed land. However, that is not to say that development on garden land is always harmful, but rather it needs to be balanced against the impact of the development on the character of the area and other planning policies which require the efficient use of land to provide housing.
6.2.2 The density of the proposed development would be appropriate for this area of medium accessibility and the provision of a family dwelling is welcomed.
6.3 Design
6.3.1 Upper Deacon Road is characterised by a mix of residential types and architectural styles, including detached and semi-detached housing. The existing site is significantly wider than is typical of the street and as such, the insertion of an additional dwelling can be achieved without appearing cramped within the street scene. There would be sufficient spacing between the side elevations of the proposed dwelling and the boundaries with the neighbouring properties to ensure the suburban character of the street is retained. In addition to this, the proposal would retain a generous rear garden for the existing property and provide a good sized rear garden for the proposed dwelling, in keeping with the spacious character of the area. As such, it is considered that in spatial terms, the development of garden land in this instance would not be harmful to the character of the area.
6.3.2 The appearance of the proposed dwelling is traditional and design features are incorporated which are typical of the street scene. A pitched roof form is chosen to enable to use of the roof space to provide further habitable accommodation and whilst the properties which immediately neighbour the site have hipped roof forms, pitched roof forms are present within the street scene. As such, it is considered that the property would appear as a sympathetic addition within the street scene.
4
6.4 Residential amenity 6.4.1 In terms of residential amenity, whilst the proposed dwelling would project further into the site than the neighbouring property at 191 Upper Deacon Road, the application property would be positioned at a lower level and the gap between the two properties would ensure that no harm to residential amenity would occur. 6.4.2 There are no habitable room windows within the east side elevation of the existing property at 187 Upper Deacon Road and the proposal would accord with the '45 Degree' code for outlook and daylighting to the habitable room windows in the front elevation of this property. 6.4.3 There is approximately 60 metres separation distance between the rear elevation of the property and the properties beyond the rear site boundary which comfortably exceeds the privacy distances required by the Residential Design Guide. A condition is suggested to prevent the insertion of windows within the first floor side elevations of the property to prevent any future overlooking issues from arising.
6.5 Residential Standards 6.5.1 The rear garden of the proposed dwelling exceeds the Council’s maximum standards and would benefit from a good level of privacy. Outlook from habitable room windows would also be acceptable. 6.5.2 Cycle and refuse storage can be accommodated on the site which would meet the needs of the prospective occupiers and not have a significant impact on the street scene.
6.6 Highways and parking 6.6.2 The site lies within an area of “Medium Accessibility” for public transport and the level of car parking proposed would accord with the Council's adopted maximum standards. The access into the site benefits from good visibility and on-site turning would be provided to obviate the need for vehicles to back onto or off of the public highway.
7.0 Summary
7.1 The proposed development would be in keeping with the site and the surrounding area and would not have a harmful impact on residential amenity. The dwelling would provide a good residential environment for prospective residents and the provision of a family dwelling is welcome. The proposal is not at odds with the recent changes to PPS3 (as outlined above) or the Council’s design guidance relating to established character.
8.0 Conclusion
8.1 This application has been assessed as being acceptable to residential amenity and its local context. The application is recommended for conditional approval.
Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 Documents used in the preparation of this report Background Papers
1(a), 1(b), 1(c), 2(c), 2(d), 2(e), 4(s), 6(a), 6(c), 6(d), 6(h), 6(g), 6(k), 7(a), 7(m), 7(v), 8(a), 9(a), 9(b) and PPS3 (2010)
JT for 26/10/10 PROW Panel
5
PLANNING CONDITIONS
01. APPROVAL CONDITION - Full Permission Timing Condition - Physical works
The development works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date on which this planning permission was granted.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
02. APPROVAL CONDITION - Samples details of building materials to be used [Pre- Commencement Condition]
No work for the construction of the buildings hereby permitted shall commence unless and until details and samples of the materials and finishes to be used for the external walls, windows, doors and roof of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be implemented only in accordance with the agreed details.
Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interest of the visual amenities of the locality and to endeavour to achieve a building of high visual quality.
03. APPROVAL CONDITION - Landscaping detailed plan [Pre-Commencement Condition]
Before the commencement of any site works a detailed landscaping scheme and implementation timetable, which clearly indicates the numbers, planting densities, types, planting size and species of trees and shrubs to be planted, means of enclosure, lighting and treatment of hard surfaced areas, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The landscaping scheme shall specify all trees to be retained and to be lost and shall provide an accurate tree survey with full justification for the retention of trees or their loss. Any trees to be lost shall be replaced on a favourable basis (a two-for one basis unless circumstances dictate otherwise) to ensure a suitable environment is provided on the site.
Any trees, shrubs, seeded or turfed areas which die, fail to establish, are removed or become damaged or diseased, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting shall be replaced by the Developer in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. The Developer shall be responsible for any replacements for a period of 5 years from the date of planting.
The approved scheme shall be carried out prior to occupation of the building or during the first planting season following the full completion of building works, whichever is sooner. The approved scheme implemented shall be maintained for a minimum period of 5 years following its complete provision.
Reason: To improve the appearance of the site and enhance the character of the development in the interests of visual amenity, to ensure that the development makes a positive contribution to the local environment and, in accordance with the duty required of the Local Planning Authority by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 6
04. APPROVAL CONDITION - no storage under tree canopy [Performance Condition]
No storage of goods including building materials, machinery and soil, shall take place underneath the crown spread of the trees to be retained on the site. There will be no change in soil levels or routing of services through tree protection zones or within canopy spreads, whichever is greater. There will be no fires on site. There will be no discharge of chemical substances including petrol, diesel and cement mixings within the tree protection zones or within canopy spreads, whichever is greater.
Reason: To preserve the said trees in the interests of the visual amenities and character of the locality.
05. APPROVAL CONDITION - Overhanging tree loss [Performance Condition]
For the duration of works on the site no trees on or overhanging the site shall be pruned/cut, felled or uprooted otherwise than shall be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any tree removed or significantly damaged, other than shall be agreed, shall be replaced before a specified date by the site owners /site developers with two trees of a size, species, type, and at a location to be determined by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To secure a satisfactory setting for the proposed development and to ensure the retention, or if necessary replacement, of trees which make an important contribution to the character of the area.
06. APPROVAL CONDITION - Tree Retention and Safeguarding [Pre-Commencement Condition]
All trees to be retained pursuant to any other condition of this decision notice shall be fully safeguarded during the course of all site works including preparation, demolition, excavation, construction and building operations. No operation in connection with the development hereby permitted shall commence on site until the tree protection as agreed by the Local Planning Authority has been erected. Details of the specification and position of all protective fencing shall be indicated on a site plan and agreed with the Local Planning Authority in writing before any site works commence. The fencing shall be maintained in the agreed position until the building works are completed, or until such other time that may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority following which it shall be removed from the site. REASON: To ensure that trees to be retained will be adequately protected from damage throughout the construction period.
07. APPROVAL CONDITION- Land Contamination investigation and remediation [Pre- Commencement & Occupation Condition] Prior to the commencement of development approved by this planning permission (or such other date or stage in development as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority), a scheme to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include all of the following phases, unless identified as unnecessary by the preceding phase and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
7
1. A desk top study including; historical and current sources of land contamination results of a walk-over survey identifying any evidence of land contamination identification of the potential contaminants associated with the above an initial conceptual site model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors a qualitative assessment of the likely risks any requirements for exploratory investigations.
2. A report of the findings of an exploratory site investigation, characterising the site and allowing for potential risks (as identified in phase 1) to be assessed.
3. A scheme of remediation detailing the remedial actions to be taken and how they will be implemented.
On completion of the works set out in (3) a verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority confirming the remediation actions that have been undertaken in accordance with the approved scene of remediation and setting out any measures for maintenance, further monitoring, reporting and arrangements for contingency action. The verification report shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation or operational use of any stage of the development. Any changes to these agreed elements require the express consent of the local planning authority. REASON: To ensure land contamination risks associated with the site are appropriately investigated and assessed with respect to human health and the wider environment and where required remediation of the site is to an appropriate standard.
08. APPROVAL CONDITION - Use of uncontaminated soils and fill [Pre-Commencement Condition] Clean, uncontaminated soil, subsoil, rock, aggregate, brick rubble, crushed concrete and ceramic shall only be permitted for infilling and landscaping on the site. Any such materials imported on to the site must be accompanied by documentation to validate their quality and be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval prior to the occupancy of the site. REASON: To ensure imported materials are suitable and do not introduce any land contamination risks onto the development.
09. APPROVAL CONDITION- Unsuspected Contamination [Performance Condition] The site shall be monitored for evidence of unsuspected contamination throughout construction. If potential contamination is encountered that has not previously been identified no further development shall be carried out unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Works shall not recommence until an assessment of the risks presented by the contamination has been undertaken and the details of the findings and any remedial actions has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Any changes to the agreed remediation actions will require the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure any land contamination not previously identified is assessed and remediated so as not to present any significant risks to human health or, the wider environment. 8
10. APPROVAL CONDITION - Code for Sustainable Homes [Pre-Occupation Condition]
Written documentary evidence demonstrating that the development will achieve at minimum Level 3 of the Code for Sustainable Homes shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority and verified in writing prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted, unless an otherwise agreed timeframe is agreed in writing by the LPA. The evidence shall take the form of a post construction certificate as issued by a qualified Code For Sustainable Homes certification body.
REASON: To ensure the development minimises its overall demand for resources and to demonstrate compliance with policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
11. APPROVAL CONDITION - Renewable Energy - Micro-Renewables (Pre- Commencement Condition)
An assessment of the development’s total energy demand and a feasibility study for the inclusion of renewable energy technologies on the site, that will achieve a reduction in CO2 emissions [as required in core strategy policy CS20] must be conducted. Plans for the incorporation of renewable energy technologies to the scale that is demonstrated to be feasible by the study, and that will reduce the CO2 emissions of the development [as required in core strategy policy CS20] must be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby granted consent. Renewable technologies that meet the agreed specifications must be installed and rendered fully operational prior to the first occupation of the development hereby granted consent and retained thereafter.
REASON: To reduce the impact of the development on climate change and finite energy resources and to comply with adopted policy CS20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Adopted Version (January 2010).
12. APPROVAL CONDITION - Material Storage (Pre-Commencement Condition)
No work shall be carried out on site unless and until provision is available within the site, in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, for all temporary contractors buildings, plant and stacks of materials and equipment associated with the development and such provision shall be retained for these purposes throughout the period of work on the site. At no time shall any material or equipment be stored or operated from the public highway. REASON: To avoid undue congestion on the site and consequent obstruction to access.
13. APPROVAL CONDITION - Wheel Cleaning Facilities [Pre-Use Condition]
During the period of the preparation of the site, excavation for foundations or services and the construction of the development, wheel cleaning facilities shall be available on the site and no lorry shall leave the site until its wheels are sufficiently clean to prevent mud being carried onto the highway. REASON: In the interests of highway safety.
9
14. APPROVAL CONDITION - Residential - Permitted Development Restriction [Performance Condition]
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended), or any Order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order, no building or structures within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes as listed below shall be erected or carried out to any dwelling house hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority: Class A (enlargement of a dwelling house), including a garage or extensions, Class B (roof alteration), Class C (other alteration to the roof), Class D (porch), Class E (curtilage structures), including a garage, shed, greenhouse, etc., Class F (hard surface area) Class G (heating fuel store) or Class H (satellite antenna or dish)
Reason: In order that the Local Planning Authority may exercise further control in this locality given the small private garden and amenity areas provided as part of this development in the interests of the comprehensive development and visual amenities of the area.
15. APPROVAL CONDITION - Hours of work for Demolition / Clearance / Construction [Performance Condition]
All works relating to the demolition, clearance and construction of the development hereby granted shall only take place between the hours of; Monday to Friday 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours (8.00am to 6.00pm) Saturdays 09:00 hours to 13:00 hours (9.00am to 1.00pm) And at no time on Sundays and recognised public holidays. Any works outside the permitted hours shall be confined to the internal preparations of the buildings without audible noise from outside the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of existing nearby residential properties.
16. APPROVAL CONDITION - No other windows or doors other than approved in specific location [Performance Condition]
Unless the Local Planning Authority agree otherwise in writing and notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order) in relation to the development hereby permitted, no alternative or additional windows (including roof windows or dormer windows), doors or other openings other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be constructed on the side elevations of the dwelling hereby approved, above first floor level without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To protect the amenity and privacy of the adjacent property.
10
17. APPROVAL CONDITION - Refuse & Recycling Bin Storage – Details to be submitted [pre-commencement condition]
Notwithstanding the information already submitted, details of the elevations of the storage of refuse and recycling shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved. The facilities shall include accommodation for the separation of waste to enable recycling. The approved refuse and recycling storage shall be thereafter retained.
REASON: In the interests of the visual appearance of the building and the area in general.
18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Cycle Storage [performance condition]
Cycle storage shall be laid out with a level approach prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved in accordance with the plans hereby approved. The cycle storage shall be thereafter retained.
REASON: In the interests of the visual appearance of the building and the area in general and to promote alternative modes of travel to the private car.
11
Application 10/01094/FUL APPENDIX 1
POLICY CONTEXT
Core Strategy - (January 2010)
CS13 Fundamentals of Design CS19 Car & Cycle Parking CS20 Tackling and Adapting to Climate Change
City of Southampton Local Plan Review – (March 2006)
SDP1 Quality of Development SDP4 Development Access SDP5 Parking SDP9 Scale, Massing & Appearance SDP10 Safety & Security SDP11 Accessibility & Movement SDP12 Landscape & Biodiversity SDP13 Resource Conservation SDP14 Renewable Energy H1 Housing Supply H7 The Residential Environment
Supplementary Planning Guidance
Residential Design Guide (Approved - September 2006) Planning Obligations (Adopted - August 2005 and amended November 2006)
Other Relevant Guidance
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2004) PPS3 Housing (2010) PPG13 Transport (2001)
12
13 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 15
DECISION-MAKER: PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL SUBJECT: OBJECTION TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER DATE OF DECISION: 26 OCTOBER 2010 REPORT OF: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF NEIGHBOURHOODS
AUTHOR : Name: Nik Gruber, Senior Tree Officer Tel: 023 8083 4028 E-mail: [email protected] STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY None
SUMMARY This report covers the objection to The Southampton (659 Portswood Road) Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 2010 which was made on 21st May 2010. It protects one individual Ash tree ( Fraxinus excelsior ) identified as T1. RECOMMENDATIONS: (i) To confirm the Southampton (659 Portswood Road) Tree Preservation Order 2010 (see Appendix 1) without modifications REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. An objection was received from Mr de Groen of 663 Portswood Road on 31 st May 2010 with regards to the blocking of sunlight to his property and the number of seedlings the tree generates. (see Appendix 2) 2. The tree is considered to have a good visual amenity value and its loss would have an impact on the local environment and its enjoyment by the public. A Tree Evaluation Method for Preservation Orders (TEMPO) has been carried out and confirms the tree definitely merits TPO (see Appendix 3) 3. Following correspondence (see Appendix 4) a site visit was arranged and the general health and condition of the tree was discussed. There was a dispute to the claim that the tree is “a prominent feature in that part of Broadlands Road”. 4. After further negotiation and discussion on the health and condition of the tree, Mr de Groen wished to maintain his objection. He confirmed three reason:- (a) Loss of evening sunlight to the rear of my property during summer months. (b) Profusion of seedlings close to the house which not all neighbours take care to remove. (c) Proximity of the tree to my garage (approx.30 feet). Previous correspondence and background are included. (see Appendix 5) 5. There are no recent enquiries regarding re-development of the site which is unallocated. CONSULTATION 6. None
1 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED 7. If the TPO is not confirmed, without legal protection the long term retention of the tree is uncertain. DETAIL 8. A letter was received from a local resident dated 5 th March 2010, requesting a site visit to assess whether the tree could be protected as it was understood to be under threat. 9. The Ash T1 is a maturing tree in good health and condition. There were no major defects noted at the time of inspection and it is believed to have a safe useful life expectancy in excess of 40 years. 10. This tree is growing in the rear garden of 659 Portswood Road and adjacent to a garage block. The tree is not visible from Portswood Road although can be seen from Broadlands Road and the numerous surrounding properties. FINANCIAL/RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS Capital 11. None Revenue 12. If the Southampton (659 Portswood Road) TPO 2010 is confirmed, there will be the cost of administering the service of the confirmed Order and any subsequent tree work applications. Property 13. None Other 14. If The Southampton (659 Portswood Road) TPO 2010 is confirmed, compensation may be sought in respect of loss or damage caused or incurred in consequence of the refusal of any consent required under the TPO or of the grant of such consent which is subject to condition. However, no compensation will be payable for any loss of development or other value of the land, neither will it be payable for any loss or damage which was not reasonable foreseeable. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Statutory power to undertake proposals in the report : 15. Planning and Rights of Way Panel Other Legal Implications : 16. The making or confirmation of a Tree Preservation Order could interfere with the right of the property owner peacefully to enjoy his possessions but it is capable of justification under Article 1 of the First Protocol as being in the public interest (the amenity value of the tree) and subject to the conditions provided for by law (the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) and by the general principles of international law.
2
17. In so far as the tree is on private residential property the making or confirmation of a TPO could interfere with the right of a person to respect for his family life and his home but is capable of justification as being in accordance with the law and necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others (Article 8). POLICY FRAMEWORK IMPLICATIONS 18. None
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Appendices 1. The Southampton (659 Portswood Road ) TPO 2010 2. Letter of objection 3. Tree Evaluation Method for Preservation Orders - TEMPO 4. Letter responding to objection 5-7 Further correspondence Documents In Members’ Rooms Background Documents Title of Background Paper(s) Relevant Paragraph of the Access to Information Procedure Rules / Schedule 12A allowing document to be Exempt/Confidential (if applicable) 1. The Southampton (659 Portswood Road) Not applicable TPO 2010
Background documents available for inspection at : FORWARD PLAN No: None KEY DECISION? No WARDS/COMMUNITIES AFFECTED: Swaythling
3 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 1
Appendix 2
TREE EVALUATION METHOD FOR PRESERVATION ORDERS - TEMPO Appendix 3 SURVEY DATA SHEET & DECISION GUIDE
Date:0D\ Surveyor:1LN*UXEHU
Tree details TPO Ref (if applicable): 7 Tree/Group No: 7 Species:$VK Owner (if known):1$ Location:52 3RUWVZRRG5RDG
REFER TO GUIDANCE NOTE FOR ALL DEFINITIONS
Part 1: Amenity assessment a) Condition & suitability for TPO; where trees in good or fair condition have poor form, deduct 1 point
5) Good Highly suitable Score & Notes 3) Fair Suitable 1) Poor Unlikely to be suitable 0) Dead/dying/dangerous* Unsuitable * Relates to existing context and is intended to apply to severe irremediable defects only b) Retention span (in years) & suitability for TPO
5) 100+ Highly suitable Score & Notes 4) 40-100 Very suitable 2) 20-40 Suitable 1) 10-20 Just suitable 0) <10* Unsuitable *Includes trees which are an existing or near future nuisance, including those clearly outgrowing their context, or which are significantly negating the potential of other trees of better quality c) Relative public visibility & suitability for TPO Consider realistic potential for future visibility with changed land use
5) Very large trees with some visibility, or prominent large trees Highly suitable Score & Notes 4) Large trees, or medium trees clearly visible to the public Suitable 3) Medium trees, or large trees with limited view only Suitable 2) Young, small, or medium/large trees visible only with difficulty Barely suitable 1) Trees not visible to the public, regardless of size Probably unsuitable d) Other factors Trees must have accrued 7 or more points (with no zero score) to qualify
5) Principal components of arboricultural features, or veteran trees Score & Notes 4) Tree groups, or members of groups important for their cohesion 3) Trees with identifiable historic, commemorative or habitat importance 2) Trees of particularly good form, especially if rare or unusual 1) Trees with none of the above additional redeeming features (inc. those of indifferent form)
Part 2: Expediency assessment Trees must have accrued 9 or more points to qualify
5) Immediate threat to tree Score & Notes 3) Foreseeable threat to tree 2) Perceived threat to tree 1) Precautionary only
Part 3: Decision guide
Any 0 Do not apply TPO Add Scores forTotal: Decision:PHULWV732 1-6 TPO indefensible 7-11 Does not merit TPO 12-15 TPO defensible 16+ Definitely merits TPO This page is intentionally left blank
Appendix 4 Neighbourhoods Directorate Trees Team Southampton City Council Ground Floor, Civic Centre Southampton S014 7NG
Direct dial: 023 8083 4028 Fax: 023 8023 1384 Email: [email protected] Our ref: T2-520 Please ask for: Nik Gruber Minicom: 023 8083 2789
15 October 2010
Mr A R G de Groen 663 Portswood Road Southampton SO17 3SQ
Dear Mr de Groen
Re: The Southampton (659 Portswood Road) Tree Preservation Order 2010
Thank you for your letter dated 31 May 2010.
I can confirm this has been received and acknowledged as an objection to the above Tree Preservation Order (TPO).
The Council received a request from a local resident to protect the Ash tree and following my site visit I confirmed the tree was in good health and condition and was a prominent feature in that area of Broadlands Road. An assessment was made for the suitability of protection - Tree Evaluation Method For Preservation Orders (TEMPO) and I have enclosed this for your information. The Council takes tree protection very seriously and looks to retain and make legal protection of amenity trees whenever appropriate.
I understand your main objections relate to the shading and seedlings created by the tree. Although I can appreciate your concerns, this amount of is not considered excessive and is outweighed by the visual amenity value the tree provides to the area. A tree growing on private property can provide enjoyment to the public and local residents even though there is no public access. The way in which trees can visually enhance an area, provide screening, soften and green the built environment, improve air quality, provide shelter and habitat are all things to be considered. I believe these issues are important and I am sure the majority of local residents would prefer to have such benefits in their neighbourhood.
The way in which this TPO was served is standard practice across the UK and not a policy of Southampton City Council. Other than the owner of the tree(s) and immediate adjoining properties it is not a requirement to send copies of the TPO to other residents. However, I will request that our Legal and Democratic Services send you a copy of the TPO for information.
It may prove beneficial if we arrange to meet and discuss these matters further and hopefully come to some agreement on this TPO. If we are unable to reach any agreement the matter can be put to the Councils Planning and Rights of Way Panel for a decision on whether to confirm this TPO or not.
Please contact me to arrange a convenient appointment or let me know in writing how you wish to proceed.
Yours sincerely
Nik Gruber Senior Tree Officer
If you require this letter or future correspondence from us in a different format (e.g. tape, Braille, or disc) please do not hesitate to let us know.
Appendix 5 This page is intentionally left blank Appendix 6
Appendix 7 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 16
DECISION-MAKER: PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL SUBJECT: STREET NAMING – FORMER VOSPER THORNYCROFT SITE DATE OF DECISION: 26 OCTOBER 2010 REPORT OF: HEAD OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY
AUTHOR : Name: Helines Jagot Tel: 023 8083 3990 E-mail: [email protected]
STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY NOT APPLICABLE
BRIEF SUMMARY This report details the proposed street names for the new housing development at the site of the former Vosper Thornycroft shipyard. RECOMMENDATIONS: (i) Members are asked to consider the proposed street names and agree this reports recommendation. (ii) A list of names to be considered for this development are attached at Appendix 1 REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The purpose of this report is to decide the names of six new streets to enable postal addresses to be allocated to the properties before occupants take residence. 2. Also, utility companies will not install services without an official postal address allocated by the City Council. DETAIL (Including consultation carried out) 3. Crest Nicholson are redeveloping the former Vosper Thornycroft shipyard site. A plan indicating the location and the positions of the new streets is attached in Appendix 2. 4. The developer submitted a list of proposed street names which are attached at Appendix 1. 5. The SNN Officer received a suggestion from Councillor Vinson to name a street within the development after Mary Key - a former Mayor and long serving Woolston Ward Councillor. 6. In response, the developer has indicated that whilst they are keen to commemorate Mary Key’s services to the city. They are concerned that there may be a resultant misspelling of the street name, Mary Key / Mary Quay and would prefer to commemorate her services through avenues of public art or other relevant activites.
1
7. The Royal Mail has been consulted on all the names proposed and raised objection to the name ‘Thornycroft’ because of an existing Thornycroft Avenue within close proximity to the site. However they are happy with the name John Thornycroft. All the other names listed in Appendix 1 are acceptable. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS Capital/Revenue 8. There are no financial implications associated with this report. Street nameplates will be funded by the developer. Property/Other 9. None LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Statutory Power to undertake the proposals in the report : 10. The power for the City Council to name streets is contained in the Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847. Other Legal Implications: 11. None POLICY FRAMEWORK IMPLICATIONS 12. None
2
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Appendices 1. List of Proposed Street Names 2. Site Plan Documents In Members’ Rooms 1. None Integrated Impact Assessment Do the implications/subject/recommendations in the report require an N/A Integrated Impact Assessment to be carried out. Other Background Documents Title of Background Paper(s) Relevant Paragraph of the Access to Information Procedure Rules / Schedule 12A allowing document to be Exempt/Confidential (if applicable) 1. Integrated Impact Assessment and Other Background documents available for inspection at: WARDS/COMMUNITIES AFFECTED: Woolston
3 This page is intentionally left blank Street & Road Names for Centenary Quay, Woolston 28th October 2010
Order of Street Colour Proposed Name Rationale Preference
This is the primary road within the development and top of the 1) John Thornycroft Road road hierarchy. Therefore we believe it should have a strong relationship with the site’s history and to be known and recognisable to the public. The most prominent name we could label this relationship with is the name of the previous owner and 2) Oswald Road owners. Therefore for our first choice we would like to name the road as “John Thornycroft Road” relating back to one of the most Yellow recent and well known owners, John Thornycroft who acquired the site in 1904. 3) Holland Road
Options 3 and 4 are also names of past owners of the site, however the name Thornycroft we feel is more recognised locally Thornycroft – and has a longer relationship with the site than the eventual 4) REJECTED by Royal partner, Vosper ltd, that joined in 1966. Mail
This road is the most prominent road that leads off the yellow road, “Thornycroft”, and goes into the heart of the site and crucially, to the water’s edge. Therefore it is our intention to label this road “Centenary Quay” which makes references to past Blue 1) Centenary Quay operations on the site, its ability to draw people of Woolston back to the water’s edge and to make it a destination. By naming the road after the quay, it will ensure longevity of its name and purpose after the marketing promotional name has left the site. Appendix 1
Light Green To be named at a later date.
We initially looked at the possibility of extending Western Grove Road into the site. However this was not possible due to house 1) Vosper Road number 1 being adjacent to Victoria Road, thus not being able to extend it. Therefore a new name had to be created.
As long as the principle yellow road has been named John Thornycroft Road (if not we would like to rethink the secondary Orange 2) Oswald Road road names to ensure ties with the site’s history), we propose that the first choice name for this road is “Vosper Road”. This links the site’s heritage and partnership of Vosper ltd with John Thornycroft in 1966. Again the second choice of Oswald, takes 3) Albert Road reference to the owner of the site in 1878. Albert Road pays reference between the relationship of Queen Victoria and her husband Albert, and the roads Victoria Road and Albert Road.
Again as long as the principle yellow road has been labelled after 1) Albert Road John Thornycroft Road, our first choice road name is Albert Road which pays reference between the relationship of Queen Victoria Red 2) Oswald Road and her husband Albert, and the roads Victoria Road and Albert Road. Again the second choice of Oswald, takes reference to the 3) Vosper Road owner of the site in 1878. The third choice is reference to the Vosper Thornycroft partnership.
1) Joiners Mews As the road hierarchy decreases to a mews, our rational e changes from past owners of the site to actions/jobs that were Purple 2) Shipwright Mews performed on the site. Joiners Mews therefore is appealing in terms of marketing and fits well with the streetscape we are 3) Pattern Mews trying to create.
1) Foundry Court Again as the dominance of the road hierarchy decreases and the formation of this road lends itself to a court, the names of some Dark Green 2) Joiners Court of the activities on the site are trying to be captured. Foundry Court lends itself well in terms of marketing and reference to the 3) Pattern Court activities that happened on site.
Appendix 2 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 17
DECISION - MAKER: PLANNING AND RIGHTS OF WAY PANEL SUBJECT: STREET NAMING - MALVERN ROAD DATE OF DECISION: 26 OCTOBER 2010 REPORT OF: HEAD OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY
AUTHOR : Name: Helines Jagot Tel: 023 8083 3990 E-mail: [email protected]
STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY Not Applicable BRIEF SUMMARY This report details the proposed street name for the new housing development on the site of 14 – 16 Malvern Road which previously occupied by R F Webb Engineering works. RECOMMENDATIONS: (i) Members are asked to consider the proposed street name and agree this report’s recommendation. (ii) The developer has suggested ‘Arlowe Drive’. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The purpose of this report is to decide the name of a new street to enable postal addresses to be allocated to the properties before occupants take residence. 2. Also, utility companies will not install services without an official postal address allocated by the City Council. DETAIL (Including consultation carried out) 3. Lowe Developments are redeveloping the former engineering works at 14 – 16 Malvern Road. 4. A site location plan is attached for reference. 5. The developer was invited to submit suggestions for a new street name. The developer suggested: - ‘Arlowe Drive’. 6. The name derives from Mr Reginald Lowe who in 1933 set up th e engineering company which previously occupied the site. 7. The Royal Mail has been consulted and the proposed name is acceptable. 8. The name ‘Arlowe Drive’ is not being used elsewhere within the City. It is recommended that members support the proposed name. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS Capital/Revenue 9. There are no financial implications associated with this report. Street nameplates will be funded by the developer.
1 Property/Other 10. None LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Statutory Power to undertake the proposals in the report : 11. The power for the City Council to name streets is contained within the Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847. Other Legal Implications: 12. None POLICY FRAMEWORK IMPLICATIONS 13. None
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Non-confidential appendices are in the Members’ Rooms and can be accessed on-line Appendices 1. Site Plan Documents In Members’ Rooms 1. None Integrated Impact Assessment Do the implications/subject/recommendations in the report require an No Integrated Impact Assessment to be carried out. Other Background Documents Title of Background Paper(s) Relevant Paragraph of the Access to Information Procedure Rules / Sched ule 12A allowing document to be Exempt/Confidential (if applicable) 1.
2 New street name: - Arlowe Drive
Appendix 1 NORTH nks
40.8
Garage LB TCB
38.4m
Scale : 1:1250 Date :11 October 2010
© Crown copyright. All rights reserved. Southampton City Council 100019679 2004. This page is intentionally left blank