PLANNING COMMITTEE 2 MARCH 2011
3 PM CONFERENCE ROOM A CIVIC OFFICES
REPORT BY THE CITY PLANNING OFFICER ON PLANNING APPLICATIONS
ADVERTISING AND THE CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS All applications have been included in the Weekly List of Applications, which is sent to City Councillors, Local Libraries, Citizen Advice Bureaux, Residents Associations, etc, and is available on request. All applications are subject to the City Councils neighbour notification and Deputation Schemes. Applications, which need to be advertised under various statutory provisions, have also been advertised in the Public Notices Section of The News and site notices have been displayed. Each application has been considered against the provision of the Development Plan and due regard has been paid to their implications of crime and disorder. The individual report/schedule item highlights those matters that are considered relevant to the determination of the application
REPORTING OF CONSULTATIONS The observations of Consultees (including Amenity Bodies) will be included in the City Planning Officer’s report if they have been received when the report is prepared. However, unless there are special circumstances their comments will only be reported VERBALLY if objections are raised to the proposals under consideration
APPLICATION DATES The two dates shown at the top of each report schedule item are the applications registration date- ‘RD’ and the last date for determination (8 week date - ‘LDD’)
HUMAN RIGHTS ACT The Human Rights Act 1998 requires that the Local Planning Authority to act consistently within the European Convention on Human Rights. Of particular relevant to the planning decisions are Article 1 of the first protocol- The right of the Enjoyment of Property, Article 6- Right to a fair hearing and Article 8- The Right for Respect for Home, Privacy and Family Life. Whilst these rights are not unlimited, any interference with them must be sanctioned by law and go no further than necessary. In taking planning decisions, private interests must be weighed against the wider public interest and against any competing private interests Planning Officers have taken these considerations into account when making their recommendations and Members must equally have regard to Human Rights issues in determining planning applications and deciding whether to take enforcement action.
Web: http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk
1 01 10/01159/FUL WARD:Cosham
Construction Site (Residential) 41 St Matthews Road Portsmouth
Construction of two semi-detached houses (resubmission of 10/00272/FUL)
Application Submitted By: The Project Support Practice
On behalf of: Liberty Investments (Property) Ltd
RDD: 25th November 2010 LDD: 4th April 2011
SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
The application site comprises the eastern most two-thirds of the former curtilage of number 41 St Matthews Road, a recently demolished bungalow. The site is located within a residential area which is characterised by a mix of housing styles. To the west are larger detached houses set within spacious plots. To the south and east are smaller detached houses with plots of some 26 metres in length, and to the north-east are three storey houses within 25 metre plots.
Planning permission is sought for the construction of a pair of asymmetric, two-storey, semi- detached dwellings. The proposed dwellings would have an irregular but broadly rectangular footprint and be sited towards the front of the site which narrows from approximately 23 metres wide at its frontage with St Matthews Road to a pinch point approximately 10 metres wide three- quarters of the way down the rear garden after which it widens to 12 metres. The dwellings would be of a traditional design with a hipped roof over with subordinate two-storey front and rear projections. Access to the site would be from a new crossover formed to the eastern edge of the site giving vehicular access to a garage/parking court to be created at the end of the rear gardens. During the life of the application, the site location and layout plans have been amended to reflect the ownership of the applicant.
Planning permission was granted in October 2007 (under reference 07/01533/FUL) for the construction of one detached dwelling and two semi-detached dwellings following the demolition of the bungalow on the site. Planning permission was granted (10/00822/FUL) in October 2010 for a single dwelling of a revised design on the western third of the site. The current application site broadly relates to the approved curtilage of the two semi-detached dwellings.
This application was withdrawn from the agenda of the Planning Committee for its meeting on 2nd February to resolve an issue with the submitted certificate of ownership.
POLICY CONTEXT
The relevant policies within the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 would include: DC1 (Design Principles), DC5 (Amenity and Pollution), DC9 (Storage of Refuse), DC21 (Contaminated Land), DC25 (Transport Issues in New Development), DC27 (Contributions Towards Transport Improvements), DC28 (Parking Standards), DC46 (Public Open Space in New Residential Development), DC47 (Residential density).
PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development & PPS3 - Housing
The Residential Car Parking Standards SPD and the Planning Obligations SPD are also relevant to the proposed development.
2 CONSULTATIONS
Highways Engineer No objection subject to increase in width of access at junction with St Matthews Road to allow two cars to pass. EPPS - Contaminated Land Team Condition relating to land contamination not required. Tree Memo Protected trees in adjacent property will not be affected.
REPRESENTATIONS
Six letters of representation have been received raising the following objections; a) submitted drawings inaccurate; b) impact of proposed parking area on hedge on boundary of own property; c) loss of trees/bushes contrary to claims made in application form; d) loss of privacy; e) access and turning area inadequate leading to potential highway safety issues; f) over development; g) potential for garages to be converted to a dwelling; h) request for conditions to reduce noise from development; i) increase security risk to rear of adjacent houses; j) loss of view of Portsdown Hill; k) inadequate parking provision; l) loss of garden land; m) loss of light to rears of adjacent properties; n) impact of access to rear parking area on residential amenities of adjacent properties; and o) loss of property value.
A letter has been received from Penny Mordaunt MP following representations by local residents who raises concerns relating to the recent redesignation of gardens as greenfield land, the overcrowding of the site, the impact on adjacent properties especially with regard to sunlight and privacy, a previous appeal for a bungalow at the rear of the site being dismissed on the grounds relating to the impact on the rear gardens of neighbouring properties and the impact of the proposed access on highway safety.
COMMENT
The determining issues in this case are: whether the principle of further residential development on this site is acceptable; whether the development would have a detrimental impact to the amenities of adjoining occupiers; whether the design of the development is appropriate in relation to the character of the area; whether the proposal would have an impact to highway safety and policy considerations relating to open space and sustainable transport contributions.
Planning permission has previously been granted for the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling on the site. The principle of development has therefore been established subject to all other material considerations. Whilst the reissued PPS3 removed residential gardens from the definition of previously developed land, it is considered that the application site no longer forms the garden of a dwelling and therefore that the principle of redevelopment remains acceptable.
There are a number of differences between the current and previously approved schemes, the main differences being: the re siting of the dwellings 1.5 metres forward on the site; an increase in the overall width of the pair by 1.5 metres; and increase in the depth of the dwellings of 2.0 metres; the incorporation of a fourth bedroom to each dwelling; a reduction in the relative ridge height of 0.3 metres; the use of a shallow fully hipped roof and the formation of an access leading to a rear parking and turning area.
The relationship of the proposed dwellings with existing properties to the east would be similar to that of the previously approved scheme. Whilst the proposed dwellings would be approximately 1.5 metres closer, the proposal incorporates a fully hipped roof of shallower pitch. Accordingly it is considered that the proposed relationship would not result in an unacceptable loss of amenities to the adjoining occupiers to the east in terms of an increased sense of enclosure, loss of light and outlook.
3 Whilst the proposed access would be located at the rear of the gardens of number 43, 45 and 47 it is considered that the use of the proposed access and parking court would not give rise to a level of activity that would have a significant impact on the residential amenities of the occupiers of those dwellings. It is accepted that in 1991 an appeal for a bungalow at the rear of the site was dismissed for reasons that included the impact of an access on the occupiers of numbers 43, 45 and 47 St Matthews Road, it is considered that such a reason for refusal could not be sustained under the prevailing planning policy framework.
The proposed dwellings would have a front-to-back arrangement with principal habitable room windows either facing to the north or to the south. The one window proposed for the side elevation would serve an en-suite. It is therefore considered that the proposed houses would not allow for a significant degree of overlooking of adjoining properties and would not result in a significant loss of privacy to adjoining occupiers.
The area is characterised by a mix of predominantly detached, interspersed by some semi detached houses, of either two or three storeys in height and of a variety of design styles. The semi-detached dwellings the subject of this application are considered to be in keeping with the mixed character of the area and would be appropriate.
Since originally submitted and following the comments of the Highway Engineer, amended plans have been received increasing the width of the access at its junction with St Matthews Road to allow vehicles to pass without needing to reverse onto the highway. The application makes provision for a garage and parking space for each dwelling which is considered acceptable, as is the size of the turning area. Accordingly it is considered that the proposal is acceptable in highway terms and would not lead to increased conditions of danger to highway users.
Policies DC9, DC25 and DC28 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan require the provision of cycle and refuse storage. Details of these facilities are provided as part of the proposal and their provision and retention can be secured through the imposition of suitably worded planning conditions. The applicant has indicated a willingness to enter into a legal agreement to secure contributions towards open space and sustainable transport in accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD and therefore the proposal is considered to comply with the requirements of saved policies DC27 and DC46).
RECOMMENDATION Conditional Permission
Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission.
2) Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the permission hereby granted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings - Drawing numbers: 10/10/St.M - 01 Rev.01, 10/10/St.M - 02 Rev.01, 10/10/St.M - 03 Rev.01, 10/10/St.M - 04 Rev.01 and 10/10/St.M - 06 Rev.01 received 26/11/10 and 10/10/St.M - 05 Rev.01 received 11/01/11.
3) No development shall commence on site until details of the types and colours of external materials to be used has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
4) The garages, parking spaces, turning facilities and access, including the footway crossing shall be constructed before the either of the dwellings hereby permitted are first occupied. The garages, parking and turning areas shall be retained for those purposes at all times.
5) Prior to the first occupation of either of the the dwellings hereby approved, the facilities for the storage of bicycles shall be provided and thereafter retained for that purpose.
4 6) Prior to the first occupation of either the dwellings hereby approved, the facilities for the storage of refuse and recyclable materials shall be provided and thereafter retained.
7) Any windows at first floor level on the east facing elevation shall be glazed with obscured glass and be non-openable below 1.7m above floor level and shall be permanently maintained in that condition.
The reasons for the conditions are:
1) To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2) To ensure the development is implemented in accordance with the permission granted.
3) In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with policy DC1 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
4) In order to provide satisfactory parking and access arrangements in accordance with saved policies DC1, DC5, DC25 and DC28 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
5) To encourage the use of alternative methods of transport in accordance with saved policies DC25 and DC28 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
6) In the interests of the amenities of the area in accordance with saved policy DC9 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
7) To protect the privacy of the adjoining property and to prevent overlooking in accordance with policy DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
The reason for the recommendation is:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed development is acceptable in principle and will not have a significant impact to the amenities of adjoining occupiers in terms of loss of light, outlook, privacy or the creation of a sense of enclosure. Furthermore, the design of the proposed dwellings are appropriate in relation to adjoining houses and the character of development within the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore in accordance with saved policies DC1, DC5, DC9, DC21, DC25, DC27, DC28, DC46 and DC47 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
02 11/00033/HOU WARD:Copnor
56 Althorpe Drive Portsmouth
Construction of single/two storey extension to form link between house and garage (resubmission of A*37191/AB)
Application Submitted By: Mr Michael Lawrence
RDD: 13th January 2011 LDD: 15th March 2011
5
SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
This application relates to a two-storey end of terrace townhouse, with additional living accommodation within the roofspace, located at the eastern end of Althorpe Drive, just east of the junction with Boughton Court and Blakesley Lane. The property is located centrally within a double plot, when compared to its neighbours to the north and south, with a large rear conservatory, a front driveway capable of accommodating two vehicles and a detached double garage off-set to the front of the dwelling. The adjoining property to the north (No.2 Buckby Lane) is aligned at an angle (approximately 45 degrees) to the applicant's property and has a pitched roofed garage adjacent to the common boundary. The properties are located within a low density 1980s housing estate characterised by similar style properties of varying sizes on a number of winding roads and cul-de-sac with open front gardens and driveways. The property is located within an indicative flood zone.
The applicant seeks permission for the construction of a single/two-storey extension to form a link between the house and the detached garage.
Conditional Permission was granted in September 2002 for the construction of a single/two storey extension to form a link between the house and the detached garage. This scheme which was identical to that proposed within the current application has now lapsed.
Conditional Permission was granted in February 2000 for the construction of a two-storey link extension between the house and the garage and alterations to the garage roof. This was a similar scheme to that proposed within the current application but included a smaller single- storey element.
POLICY CONTEXT
The relevant policies within the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 would include: DC1 (Design Principles), DC5 (Amenity and Pollution).
Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk
CONSULTATIONS
EPPS - Contaminated Land Team Given the limited scope of the works, a condition relating to land contamination is not required. However, the developer should be made aware several contaminative uses have historically been present in and around the vicinity of the site. The site was formerly part of Portsmouth City Airport and has been owned by the MOD. The site is also in the vicinity of an area of unknown infill.
An informative should therefore be added, advising the developer that they should contact this department if any unexpected materials or materials of concern are uncovered as part of the works for advice on the need for chemical testing and/or remedial measures to be incorporated into this development. Langstone Harbour Board The Board's Planning Sub Committee has considered this application and has no objections to the proposals.
REPRESENTATIONS
Three letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of neighbouring properties to the north-east. The objections relate to a) inappropriate scale and massing; b) increased sense of enclosure; c) overbearing impact; d) loss of privacy; e) loss of light; and f) the extension is out
6 of character with the surrounding Anchorage Park Estate. One objection also refers to Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
COMMENT
The determining issues in this application are whether the appearance of the proposed extension relates satisfactorily to the recipient property and the surrounding area, and whether the proposals would have any significant adverse impact on the amenity of the adjoining occupiers. It is not considered that the proposals would result in any increased flood risk on the site. The planning permission for an identical proposal (ref. A*37191/AB) granted in 2002 would also be material to the consideration of this application.
The applicant proposes to construct a two storey link between the front section of the side elevation of the existing dwelling and a detached double garage, and a single storey 'lean-to' extension to the rear section of the side elevation. The two-storey element would extend at approximately 45 degrees to the existing dwelling running parallel to a detached single storey garage with a pitched roof located on the common boundary within the adjoining property (No.2 Buckby Lane). The extension would have an overall ridge height of 5.9 metres which would actually sit 0.5 metres below the eaves of the existing dwelling and 3.6 metres lower than the existing ridge. To the front elevation windows would be located at ground floor level and within dormers in the roof. To the rear a single door and window is located at ground floor level with an additional window located on the north-east elevation of the upper floor.
The single-storey element of the extension would extend along the side elevation of the original dwelling. This would contain a door and window leading from a utility room into the garden and a second window that would serve the ground floor shower room. This part of the extension would be topped by a lean-to roof measuring 2.3 metres at the eaves and 3.7 metres where it meets the existing dwelling. Both parts of the extensions would be constructed in facing brick to match the existing dwelling and would continue the decorative brick banding from the main dwelling around the perimeter of the extension. Tiles and window finishes would also match those of the main dwelling. Internally the extension would provide two bedrooms at first floor level, and by using part of the existing house, an annexe at ground floor level would include a kitchen, bedroom, lounge and shower room. Given the creation of an annexe it would be necessary to impose a condition requiring that the extension including the annexe shall be used together as part of a single residence and shall not be used as an independent unit of living accommodation.
Whilst this is not a common form of extension found within the Anchorage Park Estate, it is considered that given the size of the plot and the existing building, the extension would relate appropriately in terms of design, scale and massing, and would not significantly affect the character or appearance of the streetscene. Whilst the proposals would represent an increase in bulk close to the common boundary with No.2 Buckby Lane, the height of the extension has been kept to a minimum by the addition of dormer windows to the front elevation which allows much of the upper storey to be contained within the roof space. Whilst it is noted that the extension could lead to a slight increase in shadowing across the rear gardens of properties to the north during winter months, it is not considered that the impact would be so significant as to warrant the refusal of this application.
To the north a small terrace containing four dwellings is positioned at approximately 45 degrees to the application site. Given the orientation of this terrace, it is not considered that the proposals would have any significant impact on the rooms located to the rear in terms of loss of outlook, light or increased sense of enclosure. Within the gardens of these properties it is not considered that the scale or location of the extension would result in a significant overbearing presence or significantly affect outlook. Given the open nature of the rear gardens in this area and the distance to dwellings to the north-east, the proposals would not result in a significant increased sense of enclosure.
A single window is proposed on the upper floor of the rear elevation overlooking gardens to the north. However, this window would serve a corridor and would only offer oblique views across 7 the gardens rather than direct views. Given this and the degree of separation between the window and the adjoining gardens, it is not considered that it would be appropriate to impose a planning condition requiring that this window should be obscure glazed or non-opening.
The proposals within this application are identical to those granted Conditional Permission in September 2002 (ref. A*37191/AB). The one exception is that the recipient property now has a rear conservatory measuring approximately 5.4 metres wide by 2.6 metres deep. It is not considered that the addition of this conservatory in the intervening period between applications materially alters the way in which the proposals relate to the recipient building, the surround area or would cumulatively adversely affect the living conditions of the adjoining residents. The proposals are therefore considered to be in accordance with policies DC1 and DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan.
RECOMMENDATION Conditional Permission
Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission.
2) Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the permission hereby granted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings - Drawing numbers: GA1-C and GA2-C.
3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture those on the existing building. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
4) The extension hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling known as 56 Althorpe Drive, Anchorage Park, Portsmouth.
The reasons for the conditions are:
1) To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2) To ensure the development is implemented in accordance with the permission granted.
3) In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policy DC1 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
4) The unit of accommodation is not in a satisfactory position to be occupied separately from the main dwelling in accordance with policies DC1 and DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
The reason for the recommendation is:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed extension will not have a significant impact on the amenities of the adjoining occupiers in terms of loss of light, outlook, privacy or . Furthermore, the extension is considered to be of an appropriate design in relation to the recipient building and adjoining dwellings. The proposal is therefore in accordance with policies DC1 and DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
8 03 10/01168/FULR WARD:St Thomas
Walton Court & Haywards Court Armory Lane Portsmouth
Application to extend planning permission 07/01448/FUL to install 2.2m high electric security gates to car park entrance fronting King Charles Street
Application Submitted By: Labyrinth Properties Ltd
On behalf of: Third Gunwharf Gate Management Co Ltd
RDD: 26th November 2010 LDD: 21st January 2011
SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
This application was reported on the Members Information Service on 7 January 2011. This application is presented to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Rob Wood.
The site comprises a development of three/four storey flats and terraced houses known as 'Third Gunwharf Gate' constructed in 1984. There is a large car park located to the rear of Walton Court, enclosed to the south east and west by high brick walling. The space is partially enclosed to the north by a similar wall, however a pedestrian only path links Third Gunwharf Gate with First Gunwharf Gate to the rear on this side. The land concerned is not adopted highway, and is accessed from King Charles Street via a deep undercroft. Three signs are located on the site - two at the Walton Court entrance and one on a pole at the rear of the site clearly stating that there is no public right of way through the site.
To the east of the application site is a parking court serving Nos 50-56 Warblington Street. The sole vehicular access from the adjoining parking court is through the site and undercroft and onto King Charles Street.
The application site straddles the boundary of Old Portsmouth Conservation Area (No4). The undercroft, Walton Court and the eastern part of the car park are within Old Portsmouth Conservation Area (No4). Haywards Court and the western part of the car park are outside the Conservation Area.
Planning permission (ref 07/01448/FUL) was granted in November 2007 for the installation of 2.2m high electric security gates to the car park entrance fronting King Charles Street.
This application seeks the renewal of the planning permission granted under ref; 07/01448/FUL for the installation of 2.2m high electric security gates to the car park entrance fronting King Charles Street.
POLICY CONTEXT
The relevant policies within the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 would include: DC1 (Design Principles), DC10 (Conservation Areas),
The relevant policies within PPS5: Planning for the Historic Environment would include:- HE7 (Policy principles guiding the determination of applications relating to all heritage assets; HE9 (Additional policy principles guiding the consideration of applications for consent relating to designated heritage assets).
9 CONSULTATIONS
Highways Engineer Raise no objection.
REPRESENTATIONS
11 letters of representation has been received. The objections relate to: a) the proposal would deny access to all homes in Gunwharf Gate for anyone coming from Old Portsmouth who does not have a gate code; b) unreasonable restriction on pedestrian movement by a commercial organisation; c) there is no reason why the pedestrian access from Gunwharf Gate Estate No1 to King Charles Street should be stopped; d) the existing access reduces the distance to local facilities; e) the existing access helps to keep the elderly and children away from the main traffic routes; f) closing the access would isolate this part of Old Portsmouth from local shops; g) the proposal would result in increased use of cars for local shopping etc; h) there is no safe alternative route for pedestrians and cyclists; i) the notification was unfair as it was only sent to residents in Walton and Haywards Courts and should have been sent to all residences in Armory Lane; j) the objector requests that the intention for access for local residents is investigated; k) the objector suggests that the Police and Fire Brigade are consulted; l) the entrance gives vehicular access only to a parking court for 20 vehicles; m) Nos 50, 52, 54 and 56 Warblington Street have a right of way through the archway; n) safety implications for children using the gates; (o) impact to the safety of the Warblington Street/Highbury Street junction; (p) the roads in First Gunwharf Gate have been adopted by the City Council; (q) it would be unfair to the 120 residents to block this exit; (r) the undercroft provides sole vehicular access to the car parking for residents of Nos 50-56 Warblington Street; (s) First Gunwharf Gate was constructed before the Walton/Haywards Court complex and has a right of access to King Charles Street which takes precedence over the later dwellings.
Friends of Old Portsmouth Association also object to the proposal on the grounds that: a) the gates will prevent residents of Gunwharf Gate accessing Old Portsmouth by foot without having to make a detour via St Georges Road; b) the proposal encourages the use of a car; c) the previous permission should be ignored; d) most of the people affected by this development have not been neighbour notified; e) the Local Transport Plan (LTP3) places importance on accessibility by foot and cycle; f) none of the residents in Armory Lane have been contacted; g) residents of Armory Lane, Beehive Walk and the rest of Gunwharf Gate have a right of access to King Charles Street; h) no evidence for the need for the proposed gates; i) no evidence of burglary and vandalism; j) why haven't the gates already been installed; k) setting an inappropriate precedent for gated communities; l) impact to emergency access.
COMMENT
The determining issue is whether there has been any change in circumstance since the previous permission was granted that would result in a different decision.
Since the determination of planning permission 07/01448/FUL there have been the following changes.
Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) has replaced Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPG15).
Whilst PPS5 has replaced PPG15 the key determining issue in this case remains whether the proposed gates would be visually appropriate and would preserve the character and appearance of Old Portsmouth Conservation Area (No4).
The design of the gates are similar to the design of other gates nearby (erected with permission), and were considered acceptable when the previous permission was granted. It is considered that the proposed gates would still preserve the character and appearance of Old Portsmouth Conservation Area (No 4). 10
Letters of representation focus on the impact that the gates would have on pedestrian and vehicular access from First Gunwharf Gate and Nos 50-56 Warblington Street through Third Gunwharf Gate and onto King Charles Street. Third Gunwharf Gate is a private estate. The pedestrian and vehicular access, car parking and undercroft do not form part of the adopted highway network. Access from First Gunwharf Gate and Nos 50-56 Warblington Street through Third Gunwharf Gate and onto King Charles Street are therefore private matters that are not material to the determination of this planning application. In planning terms there has been no material change in circumstances and, accordingly, this proposal is considered acceptable.
RECOMMENDATION Conditional Permission
Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission.
2) The proposed new electric security gates shall be coloured black, and shall be retained in that condition thereafter.
The reasons for the conditions are:
1) To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2) In order to preserve the character and appearance of the building in accordance with policies DC1 and DC10 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
The reason for the recommendation is:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed electric security gates are considered of an appropriate design in terms of their relationship to the recipient building, and the surrounding are. It is considered that the gates would preserve the character and appearance of Old Portsmouth Conservation Area (No 4), and is therefore in accordance with policies DC1 and DC10 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
04 10/01165/ADV WARD:Various Wards
Various Locations Throughout The City Portsmouth
Display of enlarged "Welcome to Portsmouth" gateway signs and sub-plate advertising signage
Application Submitted By: Head of TSM Services Portsmouth City Council
On behalf of: Portsmouth City Council
RDD: 26th November 2010 LDD: 22nd January 2011
11 SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
This application was deferred by the Planning Committee at it's meeting of 2nd February to address issues relating to the quality of the signage, the potential for increased street clutter at the Mile End Road site, the location of the signs relative to the city boundary, the content of the advertising sub plates and the design of the signage.
This City Council scheme seeks advertisement consent to replace existing and approved signs in 2 locations with larger signs. The signs are existing non-illuminated 'Welcome to Portsmouth' gateway signs with previously approved smaller panel signs below.
The locations to which this application refers are:
1. Eastern Road north of the junction with Anchorage Road and opposite properties fronting Wilby Lane.
2. Mile End Road adjacent to the Market House Tavern and the junction with Havisham Road.
The proposed replacement 'Welcome to Portsmouth' signs would measure 2.6 metre wide by 2.0 metres high. Site 1, adjacent to Eastern Road, would have two smaller panel signs that would measure 2.6 metres wide by 0.8 and 0.67 metres high. Site 2, adjacent to Mile End Road, would have one smaller panel sign that would measure 2.6 metres wide by 0.8 metres high.
Advertisement consent was granted in April 2010 for the display of replacement non-illuminated "Welcome to Portsmouth" gateway signs measuring 1.6 metres wide by 1.2 metres high in eight locations across the city, each having a sub-plate measuring 1.6 metres wide by 0.5 metres high with Site 1 at Eastern Road having a second sub-plate measuring 1.6 metres wide by 0.4 metre high.
POLICY CONTEXT
Planning Policy Guidance 19: Outdoor Advertisement Control is relevant to the proposed development.
CONSULTATIONS
Highways Engineer No comments received.
REPRESENTATIONS
Three letters of representation have been received. The objections are: a) adverse impact on the Conservation Area; b) any signage in Southsea should say welcome to Southsea not to Portsmouth as Southsea is an important tourist area; c) the signage should read Welcome to Portsmouth and Southsea; d) signs which read Welcome to Portsmouth would be an eyesore in Southsea; e) impact to city tourism; f) damaging visual impact leading to a loss of amenity; g) signage cheap and lacking dignity or pride; and h) content of signs inappropriate.. The Southsea Association object to the proposed advertisements on the following grounds: a) the design and presentation of the signs should be controlled; b) any change to the advertisements should be the subject of a further application and c) Signs in Southsea should state Welcome to Southsea.
COMMENT
The determining issues in this case relate to visual amenity and public safety, principally in respect of the highway. It is, therefore, necessary to consider whether the signs would have a harmful impact on the appearance of the relevant site or an amount to an unacceptable
12 distraction to highway users. Consideration also needs to be given to the reasons why the application was deferred at the last meeting.
This application seeks consent to display larger signs than those given consent in April 2010. The previously approved smaller sub-plates have only been installed at two sites (at the exits to the Commercial Ferry Port and IoW Ferry). The two sites to which this application relates both have the previously approved smaller 'Welcome to Portsmouth' signs being displayed. The applicant advises that consent is being sought for larger signs to increase the visibility of the signs and to better promote the city.
The proposed 'Welcome to Portsmouth' signs would be approximately 1.47 metres wider and 0.8 metres taller than the existing signs and display the sign with a blue background with white and yellow text. The smaller panel signs would be 1.47 metres wider and 0.3 metres taller than previously approved and would have a white background with black or red text. The content of the signs would be the same as previously approved with the exception of changes to the font of some of the lettering on the 'Welcome to Portsmouth' sign to improve its legibility. The applicant advises that the signs would be constructed using the same materials as previously approved which was chosen to match other highway signage.
The details of the proposed signs are summarised below;-
Site 1 is on a grassed highway verge on the A2030 Eastern Road and between the roundabout controlled junction with the A27 and the traffic light controlled junction with Anchorage Park. The site was chosen as being the most appropriate location on the A2030 Eastern Road to the south of its junction with the A27. The signs would be located opposite houses facing Wilby Lane, which are within the Anchorage Park Estate. Given the separation distance to these properties and the size of the signs it considered that the signs would not have any effect on outlook or the visual amenity of the area.
Site 2 is on a grassed highway verge adjacent to the Market House Tavern on Mile End Road. This is a busy entrance into the city at the southern end of the M27 motorway. Members were concerned about the potential for increase street clutter in thus location and whilst it is acknowledged that there are a number of other signs within the immediate surrounding area. However it is considered that having regard to the proposed signs being replacements for existing and previously approved signs, the proposal would not lead to an unacceptable accumulation of signage that would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the streetscene. To the east of the site lies a line of mature trees, which screen residential properties to the rear.
This application for Advertisement Consent gives an indication of the content of the proposed sub-plates, however, the precise detail of the content of the advertisements would be beyond the scope of this application.
The signs are considered acceptable both in highway safety terms and in terms of visual amenity.
RECOMMENDATION Conditional Consent
Conditions
1) Any advertisements displayed and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
2) Any hoarding or similar structure, or any sign, placard, board or device erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a safe condition.
13 3) Where any advertisement is required under these Regulations to be removed, the removal thereof shall be carried out to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.
4) No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.
5) Advertisements shall not be sited or displayed so as to obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of any road traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air, or so as otherwise to render hazardous the use of any highway, railway, waterway (including any coastal waters) or aerodrome (civil or military).
The reasons for the conditions are:
1) As required by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations.
2) As required by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations.
3) As required by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations.
4) As required by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations.
5) As required by the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations.
The reason for the recommendation is:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed 'Welcome to Portsmouth' signs and advertisement panels would not have an adverse impact on visual amenity or public safety. The proposal is therefore in accordance with PPG 19 Outdoor Advertisement Control.
05 10/01265/FUL WARD:Cosham
The Wymering Arms PH 113 Medina Road Portsmouth
Construction of a two-storey building with accommodation within the roof to form 15 flats with associated car parking (following demolition of existing building)
Application Submitted By: PLC Architects
On behalf of: Bacchus Partners Ltd
RDD: 23rd December 2010 LDD: 25th March 2011
SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
The application site comprises the curtilage of the Wymering Arms, a two-storey detached building in use as a public house. The existing building is set back in the south-western corner of the site with a large area of hardstanding to the front and used for the parking of vehicles. The
14 site is located on the western corner of the junction of Brighstone and Medina Roads. The site at it closest point is located 85 metres east of the boundary of the Old Wymering Conservation Area.
Planning permission is sought for the redevelopment of the site following the demolition of the existing building by the construction of a two-storey building with accommodation in the roofspace to form 15 flats. The proposal would take the form of an 'L-shaped' building sited close to the site frontages and wrapping around the junction of Medina and Brighstone roads. To the rear of the building would be a parking court of 9 spaces and access by a new driveway alongside number 2 Brighstone Road. The proposed accommodation would comprise four one- bed and two 2-bed flats to the ground floor, three 1-bed and three 2-bed flats to the first floor and one 1-bed and two 2-bed flats within the roof.
There is no planning history on the site that is considered relevant to this application.
POLICY CONTEXT
The relevant policies within the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 would include: DC1 (Design Principles), DC5 (Amenity and Pollution), DC9 (Storage of Refuse), DC10 (Conservation Areas), DC21 (Contaminated Land), DC25 (Transport Issues in New Development), DC27 (Contributions Towards Transport Improvements), DC28 (Parking Standards), DC40 (Affordable Housing), DC46 (Public Open Space in New Residential Development), DC47 (Residential density),
PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development, PPS3 - Housing, PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth, PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment & PPG13 - Transport
The Residential Car Parking Standards SPD and the Planning Obligations SPD are also relevant to the proposed development.
CONSULTATIONS
Highways Authority (Colas) Request imposition of informative relating to highway works EPPS - Contaminated Land Team Requires imposition of contaminated land condition EPPS - Pollution Team External noise would not be a factor affecting residents of the proposed flats. Highways Engineer No highway objection subject to conditions requiring provision of proposed car and cycle parking facilities. Head of Community Housing In respect to the unit mix Community Housing are quite pleased to see a good mix of one and two bed (3person and 4person) instead of the usual overdevelopment of two bedroom flats. All the units are above our minimum space standards so under a S106 affordable provision we are not limited to choice of units. I do believe however that we have one of our RP's looking to take on the whole site. The S106 contribution is calculated to be 4 units. Although some of the ground floor units are generous in size none meet the space standards required for a full mobility disabled unit. There are, however, three properties (flats 2, 3 and 4) that could be used for accessible disabled units. Pro-rata we would be looking at 2x 1bed, 1x 2b 3p and 1x 2b 4p flats, although we might be open to taking 3 1bed units (I would need to confirm with Housing Options once we start taking to the owners/developers). The tenure would have to be agreed with the RP as we are still unsure as to the funding. I would look to at least one accessible unit which we would hope to be social rent. The others could be LCHO or the new 'Affordable Rent'. PCC would have full nomination rights on all of the S106 affordable provision.
15 Southern Electric No response received Tree Memo No TPO trees affected by proposal Design Review Panel The existing building is a large inter-war public house with associated surface car park. The architectural style is a loose classical revival. The proposal is to create an L-shaped block of apartments. The design incorporates large gables and pitched roofs reflecting the character and appearance of the inter-war 'arts and crafts' influenced housing in the locality.
Overall the Panel was generally content with the proposals but recommended that the external materials and detailing be improved.
Recommendation: Support in design terms subject to improving the quality of the external materials and architectural detailing. Education No contributions required
REPRESENTATIONS
125 representations have been received from 104 properties raising objections relating to the following:
Inadequate parking provision for proposal exacerbating existing parking issues resulting from design/layout of estate, use of area by workers at QA Hospital and other nearby commercial business. Additional on street parking would affect highway safety as site is on a bus route and used as short cut to/from Lakeside. Loss of pub car park used by others, in particular parents dropping children at adjacent school. Proposal represents an overdevelopment of site, too many flats, building too large and out of character. Proposal would have an adverse impact on Conservation Area. Loss of privacy/overlooking, impact of access on amenities of occupiers of 2 Brighstone Road. Affect of demolition and building works on local residents. Area unsuitable for social housing and small flats. Existing iconic landmark building should be retained and converted if not viable. Loss of community facility, small shop should be provided on the site. Existing PH quiet, proposal would increase activity leading to noise and disturbance to local residents. Increased risk to safety of children attending Medina School, especially due to increased highway hazard. Loss of recycling facilities, inadequate servicing, impact of utilities/infrastructure, increased flood risk. Site should be made into allotments. Timing of submission of application just before Christmas reduced ability for interested parties to comment.
Councillor Lee Mason: Raises concerns that the proposal is unsuitable as it makes inadequate provision of parking, is of a poor design and appearance, would have an adverse affect on the setting of nearby Listed Buildings, is of too high a density, would have a detrimental impact of traffic and would result in the loss of a local amenity.
Councillor Henderson: Objects on the grounds that the proposed building has little regard to the architectural character of the area and is too large and overbearing, that the parking provision seems inadequate and there appears to be insufficient amenity space for residents.
Friends of Old Wymering: Object on the following grounds: the existing building should be retained and reused on sustainability grounds, the proposed building would not be in scale with the site, the redevelopment is at too high a density, building would be out of character and visually intrusive, proposal would affect the setting of Conservation Area, proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site, refuse and recyclable storage inadequate, inadequate parking provision and access arrangements are unsafe.
16 West Cosham Neighbourhood Forum: Offer comments relating to inadequacy of proposed parking provision, loss of community facility and the visual impact of the proposal on the streetscene.
COMMENT
The main issues to be considered in the determination of this application are the principle of development, the design and appearance of the proposal, the relationship of the proposal to neighbouring properties and the provision of car parking. Other matters to consider are the provision of cycle parking, facilities for the storage of refuse and recyclable materials and policy requirements relating to planning obligations.
The building that currently occupy's the application site dates from the mid to late 1930's and was built to serve the then recently constructed 'Isle of Wight' estate. The building whilst being in good order and having some elements of good design has been considered for protection, however is not considered to be of sufficient architectural or historic value to warrant formal protection by listing whether locally or statutorily. The principle of the demolition of the building is therefore considered acceptable. Furthermore the redevelopment of the site for residential purposes is considered to be acceptable and accord with both local and national policy requirements.
The proposed replacement building is of traditional appearance with projecting gables and other features that reflect the 'arts and crafts' detailing that characterises dwellings in the locality. The existing building sits at the back of the site with an expanse of hardstanding to the front which is at odds with the prevailing character of dwellings with small and medium front gardens. The proposed building would respect the existing pattern of development which is considered to respect the existing urban grain. The proposal incorporates accommodation within the roof space that results in a bulky roof form which would be particularly prominent when viewed from the west. The proportions of the proposed roof are considered to be out of scale with the remainder of the building such that it would appear unduly prominent and out of character with the area. Furthermore the proposed flat roofed dormer and rooflights are considered to be poorly related to the remainder of the fenestration and would exacerbate the visual impact of the inappropriate scale of the roofscape.
The existing public house is visible from the Old Wymering Conservation Area behind a row of trees located on the frontage of Medina Primary School, however it is not considered that the existing building makes a significant contribution to the setting of the Conservation Area. Having regard to the siting of the proposal within the applications site and its distance from the Conservation Area, it is considered that the proposed building would have no significant affect of the setting of the Old Wymering Conservation Area or any of the heritage assets contained therein.
The proposed building would be sited closer to the site frontages than the existing pub and would therefore be closer to dwellings to the north and east in Medina and Brighstone Roads. Having regard to the scale of the proposal and the separation distances across the intervening roads it is considered that the proposal would have no significant impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of those dwellings to the north and east. Having regard to the siting of the pub relative to the adjacent properties to the south in Brighstone Road it is considered that the proposed siting of the proposed building would potentially improve the relationship with those dwellings to the south. Whilst it is accepted that the proposed access and car parking would potential give rise to a level of noise and activity that may impact upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of number 2 Brighstone Road, regard should be had to the level of noise and activity that could reasonably be associated with the existing pub and car park. It is therefore considered that the proposal would not be likely to have a significant impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of adjacent dwellings to the south. To the west the application site is bounded by the access and playing fields to Medina Primary School, having regard to the relationship of the proposal to the school in the context of other properties adjacent to the school
17 it is considered that the proposal would not be likely to impact upon the amenities or safety of staff or pupils.
It is clear from the representations that have been received from residents living close to the application site that the area is one where there is pressure for on street parking that is perceived to affect highway safety. The application proposes nine parking spaces to serve the proposed 15 flats and is accompanied by a detailed Transport Statement that seeks to justify the proposed under provision of parking. The Council's adopted SPD relating to residential parking standards suggest that 15 communal parking spaces should be provided to serve the proposed development. The application site is located in an area classified as having a high accessibility to public transport being within 400 metres of a high frequency bus corridor and 800 metres of Cosham Railway Station. Furthermore the site is located 500 metres from the edge of Cosham District Centre. The submitted Transport Statement has been considered by the Highway Engineer who following visits to the site, concludes that the proposed level of parking would be acceptable having regard to the accessibility of the site to alternative methods of transport. It is acknowledged that the existing pub car park appears to be used by parents dropping off at and picking up pupils from Medina School, however this arrangement is informal and the therefore the loss of this facility cannot be given significant weight in the determination of this application. Furthermore it is considered that the proposal would not have a significant affect on visibility from the vehicular access serving the school and accordingly would not be likely to affect the safety of users of the access and adjacent highway.
The proposal incorporates facilities for the storage of refuse and recyclable materials in accordance with saved policy DC9 of the Local Plan. This provision could be secured through the imposition of a suitably worded planning condition. The proposal incorporates secure internal storage facilities for the parking of cycles as required by saved polices DC25 and DC27 of the Local Plan. The provision of these facilities could be secured through the imposition of a suitably worded planning condition.
Saved Local Plan policies include a requirement for affordable housing (DC40), public open space (DC46) and contributions towards transport improvements (DC27). These planning obligations are considered necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, are directly related to the development and are fairly and reasonably related in scale to the development. The applicant has confirmed a willingness to enter into a legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the provision of four affordable housing units and to make the financial contributions towards public open space and sustainable transport in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Obligations SPD. Accordingly the proposal would comply with the requirements of saved policies DC 40, DC27 and DC46.
RECOMMENDATION Refuse
The reason for the recommendation is:
The proposed building would, by virtue of the scale, design and detailing of the roof incorporating a large expanse of dummy pitched roof with a flat roof over and a flat roofed dormer and rooflights that would be poorly related to the remainder of the fenestration, would appear as unduly prominent feature in the streetscene and therefore be out of character with the area. The proposal is therefore contrary to the aims and objectives of PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development and to saved policy DC1 (ii) (vii) (viii) of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
18 06 11/00025/FUL WARD:St Jude
Southsea United Reform Church Victoria Road South Southsea
Conversion to form 8 maisonettes; external alterations to include construction of 3 storey extension (following removal of North aisle), installation of decking with glass balustrading, new doors, windows, rooflights & entrance gates
Application Submitted By: Engineering Architecture
On behalf of: Wessex Synod United Reformed Church
RDD: 11th January 2011 LDD: 15th March 2011
SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
The site comprises the vacant United Reform Church; built in 1911 to a design by notable local architect C W Bevis in the Arts and Crafts Perpendicular style. It is located on the corner of Victoria Road South and Stafford Road. The building covers almost the entire site and has been empty for about four years. It is not a listed building but is on the city council's local list of buildings of architectural or historic interest. The tower in particular has a "landmark" quality enhanced by its location at the junction opposite the Victoria Road South and Albert Road junction. To protect the building from demolition the "Owen's Southsea" Conservation Area was extended to include this property in 2007.
The proposal is to convert the property into eight maisonettes, creating a total of four levels within envelope of the existing building. The size of the units vary from about 80 - 120 square metres. The north aisle would be demolished to allow for the formation of a glazed addition to provide access to the maisonettes. A modest first floor extension is proposed at the western end of the building. Various rooflights and replacement of timber doors with glazing are also proposed. All of the maisonettes would be good sized two bedroom units except one with three bedrooms. Externally the street elevations would be little changed. The east facing wall of the north aisle would be retained to screen most of the glazed rear addition.
There is no potential to provide off-street parking spaces. Provision is shown to store 16 bicycles in secure receptacles.
POLICY CONTEXT
The relevant policies within the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 would include: DC1 (Design Principles), DC10 (Conservation Areas), DC12 (Locally Important Buildings & Structures), DC25 (Transport Issues in New Development), DC28 (Parking Standards), DC27 (Contributions Towards Transport Improvements), DC46 (Public Open Space in New Residential Development), DC5 (Amenity and Pollution), DC9 (Storage of Refuse).
In addition central government advice in Planning Policy Statements 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; 5: Planning for the Historic Environment; 3: Housing and 25 Development and Flood Risk are particularly relevant to the proposals.
REPRESENTATIONS
14 objections received. The prime concern is that there is no on-site parking provision and therefore given the dearth of on-street parking available in the area existing residents would be inconvenienced. Further comments about loss of natural light to neighbouring house to the
19 north, poor quality design of the extension, interior would be compromised by conversion, lack of good levels of natural light to some units, no usable communal open space and inadequate cycle storage. There is a level of support for the principle of residential use and one local resident has written to say that despite the lack of parking residential use as proposed would be preferable to the building remaining empty and becoming derelict. The point is made that parking is a problem nearly everywhere in Portsmouth and Southsea.
COMMENT
The key issues to be considered in the determination of this application are whether the principle of conversion to residential is an acceptable re-use of this building, the number of units proposed can be accommodated in a satisfactory manner, the design of the extension is acceptable, there is a satisfactory relationship with neighbouring properties and the impact of the resulting parking demand. Furthermore, as the site is located within a conservation area the proposal must preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the conservation area.
PRINCIPLE OF CONVERSION
This is a primarily residential area and as such the principle of conversion to residential is considered acceptable. With suitable adaptation, as proposed, the conversion would achieve good size units, however, to retain an agreeable external appearance some compromises would have to be made in terms of natural light and ventilation.
DESIGN
Little change is proposed to the two main street elevations. The north facing extension would be in the form of a mainly glazed stepped addition; this would replace the north aisle. This contrasting style would complement the architecture of the existing building by providing a "light touch". It's prime purpose would be to give access to most of the maisonettes. Some compromise would be necessary to existing windows to achieve the separate access points.
RELATIONSHIP WITH NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES
The modest extension to the west elevation would not have any significant impact on the light and outlook currently enjoyed by the neighbour in Stafford Road. The new window proposed would be non-opening and glazed with obscure glass. The north facing extension would replace the north aisle and have a lesser footprint but be slightly higher. It would be little more than a series of glazed access walkways. There is a hall window in the south facing wall of the neighbouring residential property to the north in Victoria Road South. It is not considered that this extension would have any material change on the light and outlook currently enjoyed by this neighbour. In fact the smaller footprint and glazed walls could improve the situation. In terms of privacy, there could be a slight increase in overlooking but the window in question is relatively small and gives light to a stairway, rather than a habitable room. It is considered that the proposals would comply with Policy DC5 in the local plan.
TRANSPORT/PARKING
The recommended parking provision as outlined in the Residential Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document would require 12.5 off-street parking spaces (if allocated) or 10.75 spaces (if shared). Clearly there is no scope to provide this parking. The site is located within a medium accessibility area as defined in the local plan. There are amenities, such as shops, health services and schools within close proximity and therefore a car-free lifestyle would be possible. There are also good bus services nearby. On the other hand it is difficult to park in adjacent streets particularly during the evening. It must be acknowledged that given the preference to retain this building rather than encourage redevelopment any new use is likely to generate parking demand. As this cannot be met on site the pressure would be increased on the street parking. The proposed use as eight units is not an especially dense conversion and would, it is considered, be a suitable alternative use for this former ecclesiastical building. The 20 fact that there are amenities nearby and good bus services is considered a mitigating factor to accept the application proposal without on-site car parking.
HERITAGE
The retention and re-use of this locally listed building in the manner proposed would safeguard its future. Furthermore, the alterations and extensions proposed would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. At present the building is "boarded-up" and given its prominent position detracts from the appearance of the area.
PLANNING OBLIGATIONS
Financial payments are required to improve open space and sustainable transport in the locality in line with local plan policies and the relevant supplementary planning document.
CONCLUSION
Overall the proposals respect the architectural and historic interest of the building and would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. The proposals are considered to be in compliance with Policies DC1 and DC10 in the local plan. In terms of residential amenity it is not considered there would be any significant impact on light, outlook or privacy. Clearly the lack of on-site parking is a concern and this has been reflected in the views expressed by residents. Given there is a strong desire to retain this noteworthy building, and there is no potential for on-site parking, the proposals must be considered in the light of alternative uses. There appears to be no demand for continuing the ecclesiastical use and the only other enquiries have related to possible A3 (restaurant) and A4 (drinking establishments), for which the site would be unsuitable on general amenity grounds. Office or other commercial uses would generate parking demand in a similar way to residential. The proposed conversion is considered sensitive to the building and not unduly dense. As mentioned earlier in the report this is a location where car-free living could be possible given the proximity of nearby amenities and bus services. It is therefore recommended that conditional permission should be granted.
RECOMMENDATION Conditional Permission
Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission.
2) Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the permission hereby granted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings - Drawing numbers: 076/PL01 Rev 0; 076/PL02 Rev 0; 076/PL03 Rev 0; 076/PL 04 Rev 0; 076/PL 05 Rev 0 and 076/PL 06 Rev 0.
3) Precise details of the junction between the new glazed extension and the existing north elevation shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before development commences.
4) The kitchen window in the west elevation shall be non-opening and glazed with obscured glass in accordance with details submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and shall be permanently maintained in that condition.
5) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture those on the existing building. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
6) The facilities to be provided for the storage of bicycles shall be constructed and completed before any of the maisonettes are first occupied, or within such extended period as agreed in 21 writing with the Local Planning Authority, and shall thereafter be retained for the continued use by the occupants of the maisonettes for that storage at all times.
7) Prior to the first occupation of the refuse and recyclable materials storage facilities shall be provided in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing, and those facilities shall thereafter be retained for the continued use by the occupants of the maisonettes for that storage at all times.
The reasons for the conditions are:
1) To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2) To ensure the development is implemented in accordance with the permission granted.
3) To protect the character and appearance of the building and conservation area and, furthermore, to comply with Policies DC1 and DC10 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001- 2011.
4) To protect the privacy of the adjoining property and to prevent overlooking in accordance with policy DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
5) In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policies DC1 and DC10 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
6) To ensure that adequate provision is made for cyclists using the premises in accordance with policies DC1, DC5 and DC25/DC28 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
7) To ensure that adequate provision is made for the storage of refuse and recyclable materials in accordance with policy DC9 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
The reason for the recommendation is:
The proposed residential use would in principle be compatible in this predominantly residential area and a good alternative use for this locally listed building. The limited external alterations would retain the essential architectural and historic interest. Furthermore, the extensions would not have any significant impact on residential amenity. The lack of on-site parking is unfortunate but the site is accessible being close to shops and other servicers as well as frequent bus routes. The need to find an alternative use is important to bring about refurbishment of this vacant heritage asset. The proposals are considered to comply with Policies DC1, DC5 and DC10 in particular. Furthermore, the proposals would be in line with advice in relevant Planning Policy Statements 1, 3, 5 and 25.
07 11/00038/FUL WARD:St Thomas
Wellington Street Southsea
Construction of 4 storey building to form retail shops (Class A1) at ground floor level with 12 flats above and 3 storey building to form 10 dwellinghouses
Application Submitted By: Watkins Gray International
On behalf of: Head of Local Area Housing Service Portsmouth City Council
22 RDD: 15th January 2011 LDD: 19th April 2011
SITE, PROPOSAL AND RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
The 0.3ha site is roughly rectangular in shape measuring approximately 95m long and 30m or so wide. It is part occupied by a city owned car park and the remainder forms public highway, including part of an existing roundabout junction. Works are currently being undertaken to implement a city council scheme ref 10/00963/FUL for alterations to the highway on Winston Churchill Avenue (A2030) to create a new smaller roundabout junction, enabling the proposed redevelopment as part of the Somerstown Regeneration Project to the south. To the west of the site is St James's Road and 'Eldon Building' (University of Portsmouth) beyond. To the south of the site is Wellington Street and existing houses/flats on the south side.
This City Council Scheme seeks redevelopment of the car park and adjacent highway land, in two elements. Firstly, a terrace of 10 houses is sought that is designed with a three-storey scale/appearance orientated to face onto Winston Churchill Avenue and an asymmetric roof form stepping down to a two-storey scale at the rear, with private (south-facing) gardens fronting onto Wellington Street. Secondly, a four-storey corner block would face the (new) smaller roundabout on Winston Churchill Avenue wrapping round into Grosvenor Street. Shops (Class A1) up to 296sqm internal floorspace would be located on the ground floor and 12 flats above (on three upper floors).
One car parking space is proposed per house, located within the rear curtilages and accessed from Wellington Street. A communal parking court for 9 cars, including two widened 'disabled' bays, is proposed to serve 12 flats and provision of 4 other spaces for the shops, separated by a servicing bay. Secure/weatherproof cycle stores and refuse storage facilities would be provided for the total of 22 dwellings. Eight cycle hoops (2 cycles per hoop) would serve the shops. There is a significant net loss of trees across the site although there would be some limited reprovision of tree planting onto the Winston Churchill Avenue frontage and to secure a suitably landscaped communal parking court onto Wellington Street.
POLICY CONTEXT
The relevant policies within the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 would include: ST3 (Somerstown Principal Regeneration Area), SP6 (Retail and Town Centre Development), SP7 (Housing Provision), DC1 (Design Principles), DC3 (Landmark Buildings and Features), DC5 (Amenity and Pollution), DC9 (Storage of Refuse), DC14 (Trees), DC21 (Contaminated Land), DC25 (Transport Issues in New Development), DC27 (Contributions Towards Transport Improvements), DC28 (Parking Standards), DC40 (Affordable Housing), DC46 (Public Open Space in New Residential Development), DC47 (Residential density).
Relevant policy also includes SNS1 (Comprehensive change), SNS2 (Redevelopment), SNS6 (Local centre), SNS7 (Residential development), SNS11 (General design principles), SNS14 (Developer contributions) within Somerstown and North Southsea Area Action Plan (Submission Draft, July 2010) that has been the subject of public consultation, forms a material consideration and should be afforded some weight.
Table 1 in the AAP describes a 'Summary of development proposals'; for the Wellington Street car park (Site 7) Table 1 includes appropriate land uses, storey heights in the range of 3 to 6 storeys, a target number of dwellings as 14-32 and for parking/access as 'accommodated within the block and accessed from Wellington Street'.
Relevant policies within the South East Plan (May 2009) would include: CC4 (Sustainable Design and Construction), NRM1 (Sustainable water resources), NRM10 (Noise), NRM11 (Energy Efficiency) and Renewable Energy), NRM14 (Targets for Land-based Renewable Energy).
23 Relevant central government guidance would include: Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering sustainable development Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing Planning Policy Guidance 24: Planning and Noise PPG24 advises that noise-sensitive development warrants particular attention and "especially during the hours when people are normally sleeping (23.00 to 07.00)".
CONSULTATIONS
Design Review Panel The Panel did not consider that the 4 storey corner block and terrace of houses related well to each other. Individually the terrace of houses was agreeable, except there was a rather odd roof detail behind the front parapet that did not seem to suit the overall design of the houses. Furthermore, the rear elevation, that would be quite visible from Wellington Street, was considered weak and uninspiring. An opportunity to produce a more creative boundary solution was also missed. The 4 storey block includes a section of grey render that appeared quite alien and unwarranted. The open rear yard/car park was also criticised as unappealing. Overall, although acceptable in part there were weaknesses to the scheme that should be addressed before support should be forthcoming in design terms. Recommendation: The proposals are supported in principle in design terms subject to modifications as described above. EPPS - Pollution Team The proposal has been assessed for the impact of noise from the (altered) Winston Churchill Avenue and roundabout. It is predicted that the development site would fall into (PPG 24) noise exposure category C where planning permission would not normally be granted unless, for example, there are no quieter sites available and conditions are imposed for adequate noise protection. In the circumstances, a condition requiring a scheme for insulation of the development against external noise should be imposed. The commercial use of the ground floor may impact on neighbouring residential uses. It is recommended that opening hours be restricted to times unlikely to conflict with adjoining residents. It is also strongly advised that restricting deliveries to between 7am and 7pm be applied. With regard to air quality, the proposal is unlikely to affect the nearest residential dwellings. The number of dwellings and resulting levels of traffic generated are unlikely to significantly affect the local air quality. Head of Community Housing The units, 10 x 3-bed (5 person) houses and 12 x 2-bed (4 person) flats, all meet the PCC space standards; the dwellings are proposed to be built to the Code for Sustainable Homes level 4 and the tenure of all the units will be for PCC social rented accommodation with the City Council having 100% nomination rights in perpetuity (subject to tenant's 'Right to Buy') from our housing register. Southern Electric No comments received. Southern Water Records indicate the approximate positions of multiple public sewers crossing the site, the precise positions of which should be determined by the applicant. It might be possible to divert the sewers provided there is no unacceptable loss of hydraulic capacity (at the developer's expense and detailed comments are outlined for such diversion). The Western Interceptor Sewer is a deep public sewer that may be built over, subject to agreed measures to protect the sewer before development commences. Surface water disposal is proposed by soakaway and public sewer. The redevelopment should take the opportunity to remove surface water from the combined system and find alternative means of disposal. Imposition of condition(s) for the proposed means of foul and surface water sewerage disposal to be agreed (in consultation with Southern Water) including any measures to divert the public sewers, and an Informative, are requested. Landscape Group In general, the plan is not well developed and further details required. It is not shown if any existing trees are to be retained. Other detailed matters are raised relating to both the Winston Churchill Avenue and Wellington Street frontages. For Wellington Street, the aims of the AAP to
24 improve legibility, safety and traffic safety within the residential area could be met by 'homezone' or communal shared parking arrangement. Highways Engineer The site is located within an area of high accessibility to public transport and adjoins Winston Churchill Avenue, a high frequency bus corridor and short walk to city centre and Portsmouth and Southsea railway station. Parking is proposed as an individual car space together with cycle store (plus refuse storage) to each house. 6 car spaces including 2 disabled bays are shown within the landscaped courtyard with direct access from Wellington Street. Cycle and refuse storage are shown around the rear entrance to the flats. 4 additional car parking spaces and 8 cycle hoops are provided at the south east corner of the site. Ten on-street spaces are residents parking permit controlled, the subject of a traffic regulation order, requiring amendment and an Informative is requested. The vehicle traffic generated by the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on the surrounding highway network. A condition requiring provision and retention of car and cycle parking required. Road/Footpath Closure A stopping-up order will be required; all the application site is public highway except for the car park and the extent of the land to be covered by the stopping-up has since been clarified.
REPRESENTATIONS
None at the time of writing report.
COMMENT
The main determining issues include the principle of the mix of residential and commercial use of the site, the appropriateness of the design solution in such a visually prominent location, amenity impact on the nearest residents on the south side of Wellington Street, transport and parking implications (including highways closure), loss of trees and other policy requirements (affordable housing, open space and sustainable transport).
Principle
The Somerstown and North Southsea Area Action Plan (AAP) allocate the land known as 'Site 7' as part of the proposed Local Centre for A1-A5 (full range of retail purposes) and for B1 (offices, other than A2) or C3 (dwellings) on the upper floors, with the remainder of the site for C3 (dwellings). The proposed land uses accord with emerging AAP (particularly SNS6 - Local centre) and saved Local Plan policy ST3 for regeneration of the area to achieve a new local centre close to other community facilities located to give good accessibility to the residents they serve, reduce the need to travel and to provide focal points for community activity.
Design
The comments of the Design Review Panel are set out in the consultations section of this report. Having regard to the site layout, the relationship of the four-storey corner block and terrace of houses do not relate well to each other. The set-back between the terrace and adjoining block is disappointing and presents a poor outlook from the eastern end-terrace house. However, the presence of underground public utilities is a significant site constraint that acts to prevent a continuous frontage and the cost of diverting these, on a development of this scale, would be prohibitive. The three-storey scale/appearance of the houses onto Winston Churchill Avenue is considered appropriate to the site and surroundings, in accordance with guidance in the AAP.
The asymmetric roof form steps down to two-storeys at the rear of the terrace. The proposed private rear gardens would be enclosed by 1.8m high walls with timber access gates (to an in- curtilage parking space to each house). The rear would be visible from Wellington Street and offer a rather bland and uninspiring appearance. The relationship of the two-storey houses to the adjacent four-storey block fronting Wellington Street is not ideal and a little discordant. The open service yard is not appealing and the parking court could be significantly improved by tree and hedgerow planting, external lighting, small-scale surfacing materials and robust but 25 attractive boundary treatment, designed to reinforce the residential character, security and sense of (private) ownership. A Landscape Scheme is being prepared, for reporting at the committee meeting.
The 4 storey block includes a section of grey render that the Design Review Panel commented "...appeared quite alien and unwarranted". The view of the applicant is "In the north western and south eastern corners the brickwork is stepped down one storey, replaced by grey render at third floor level to reduce the scale in relation to the houses and to reinforce the emphasis of the central (north east) elevation of this block". The introduction of grey render at third floor level is considered to detract from rather than improve the overall appearance of the 4-storey block. The applicant's agent has indicated willingness to give further consideration to this element of the appearance; if so, an alternative such as complementary but different brickwork could reasonably be controlled as part of planning condition 4 (a detailed schedule of external materials to be agreed).
There are design weaknesses to the scheme and significant scope for enhancement so that the site, in a highly visible position on the roundabout junction of the A2030 and opposite Isambard Brunel Road, is distinctive enough to have landmark value. The 4-storey block would present an active frontage at this important junction and the entrance door to the flats appropriately positioned onto Winston Churchill Avenue. Overall the design is, however, considered to relate to its surroundings in a visually acceptable manner to deliver family housing efficiently on the site.
Amenity impact
The nearest existing residential occupiers to the site are located on the south side of Wellington Street. Separation distances of some 21m-26m would ensure no significant adverse impact on the outlook from neighbouring properties. The north elevation of nos6-12 (even) Wellington Street is onto the back edge of pavement; upper floor windows would overlook proposed rear gardens across the street but this is considered to be outweighed by the advantages of south- facing gardens and need for the development to contribute positively to the streetscape by the houses fronting onto Winston Churchill Avenue. The proposed servicing to the ground floor commercial premises would be from Wellington Street. In order to protect existing and future residents from noise and general disturbance it is considered reasonable and necessary to impose conditions on deliveries (daytime only between 07.00 and 19.00) and hours of operation (to prevent use during the hours when people are normally sleeping, between 23.00 and 07.00 the following day).
Transport and parking
Vehicular access would be from Wellington Street. On-site parking is provided at 1 space per house, 9 spaces for 12 flats and 4 other spaces to serve the ground floor shops. The site is in an area of high accessibility to public transport and the level of parking provision justified in relation to relevant guidance in the Residential Parking Standards SPD, recognising that car ownership levels in city owned housing development are typically lower than that in private (open market) housing. Individual (secure and weatherproof) cycle stores would be provided for all 22 dwellings.
The Highways Authority comment that the proposed houses with rear curtilage parking accessed from Wellington Street would displace ten existing on-street parking spaces included within residents permit parking on the north side of the road; it would necessitate amendment to and removal from the Traffic Regulation Order.
Loss of trees
The applicants Design and Access Statement refers to retaining three existing trees and these appear to be 3 Acer Platanoides positioned in the north-west corner of the site, onto Winston Churchill Avenue. The site layout plan indicates new planting on the two main frontages, 5 trees 26 onto Winston Churchill Avenue and 4 trees onto Wellington Street. These offer some limited replacement for the estimated removal of 31 trees. Policy DC14(B) (Trees) normally seeks imposition of a condition requiring that an equivalent number or more new trees be planted either on or near the site. In order to achieve the delivery of houses (with gardens) and an efficient site layout it would be impractical to retain significantly more of the existing trees. The 3 existing trees to be retained should be protected during building operations, by planning condition.
Other policy requirements
All new dwellings are expected to meet public open space and sustainable transport improvement requirements of the local plan saved policies DC46 and DC27. There is also a requirement for a minimum of 30% affordable housing by DC40 but in this instance of this city council scheme all 22 dwellings are for affordable housing. These provisions are typically secured by legal agreement entered into with the city council. Since the council is the applicant a planning condition that the permission enure only for Portsmouth City Council would adequately secure provision. The open space and sustainable transport contributions will be secured by internal transfer (after resolution to grant but before the issue of permission). The planning obligations accord with local and national policy, including the council's Planning Obligations SPD, and considered to be relevant, necessary, reasonable and related (fairly) to the proposed development.
Conclusions
This city council scheme would deliver family housing and part of the proposed Local Centre on this allocated site in an efficient and sustainable manner but with a resulting significant loss of trees. Notwithstanding some weaknesses and lack of distinctiveness, the overall design is considered to relate to its surroundings in a visually acceptable manner, subject to direct payment for the above mentioned policy issues (prior to formal issue of any planning permission) and the suggested condition to meet affordable housing policy requirements, to enure only for the benefit of Portsmouth City Council.
RECOMMENDATION Conditional Permission
Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission.
2) Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the permission hereby granted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings - Drawing numbers: 110053_P001; 110053_P002_A; 110053_P003_B; 110053_P004; 110053_P005; 110053_P006; 110053_P007; 110053_P008; and, 110053_P010.
3) The permission shall only enure for the benefit of Portsmouth City Council.
4) Before development commences a detailed schedule (with samples, as may be necessary) of all external materials shall have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority; and the development shall be carried out in accordance with such agreed materials.
5) No works pursuant to this permission shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority:- (a) a desk top study documenting all the previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 and 3 and BS10175:2001; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority,
27 (b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as being appropriate by the desk study in accordance with BS10175:2001- Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice; and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, (c) a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed and proposals for future maintenance and monitoring. Such scheme shall include nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works.
6) The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of condition 5(c) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 5(c) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority such verification shall comprise; (a) as built drawings of the implemented scheme; (b) photographs of the remediation works in progress; (c) Certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free of contamination. Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 5(c).
7) No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping which shall specify species, planting sizes, spacing and numbers of trees/shrubs to be planted. The works approved shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building(s). Any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species.
8) No development shall commence on site until a scheme for the safeguarding the three trees in the north-west corner of the site not scheduled for removal during the course of the site works and building operations in accordance with British Standard:5837 (2005) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The three trees to be protected shall be fenced along a line to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority with: a) 1.5 m high chestnut paling securely mounted on scaffold framing which is firmly secured in the ground and braced to resist impact; or b) 2.4 m high heavy duty hoardings securely mounted on scaffold framing which is firmly secured in the ground and braced to resist impact. Such fencing shall be maintained during the course of the works on site. No unauthorised access or placement of goods, fuels or chemicals, soil or other materials shall take place inside the fenced area.
9) Details of the appearance, alignment, height and materials (including colour finishes) of all the boundary walls, railings and gates enclosing the curtilages of the houses, rear parking court and servicing area shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The development shall not be occupied until the walls, railings and gates have been completed and shall thereafter be retained.
10) Prior to the first occupation of the houses and flats refuse and recyclable materials storage facilities (in the positions shown on the approved plans) shall be provided in accordance with a detailed scheme to be submitted to and agreed by the local planning authority in writing, and those agreed facilities shall thereafter be retained for refuse storage at all times.
11) Prior to the first occupation of the flats, cycle storage facilities in the form of individual stores shall be provided in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and those facilities shall thereafter be retained. Prior to the first occupation of the houses details of the appearance, height and materials of individual cycle stores (for two cycles per store, measuring 28 not less than 2m x 1.2m internally) in the positions shown on the approved plans shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and those cycle facilities shall thereafter be retained.
12) The 23 car parking spaces (one space per house, 9 spaces to serve the flats and 4 spaces to serve the commercial ground floor shops) shown on the approved plan shall be surfaced (in materials to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority beforehand), marked out (to include two widened 'disabled' bays) and made available for use before first occupation of the development; and these 23 spaces shall thereafter be retained for car parking purposes.
13) The proposed accesses onto Wellington Street, including the footway crossing shall be constructed before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use.
14) The existing access to the site onto St James's shall be stopped up and the footway crossing reinstated before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use.
15) Before development commences, or such other period as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, a scheme for a) the layout of foul sewers and surface water drainage and b) measures to be undertaken to protect existing public sewers at the site, shall be submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved method of sewer and drainage layout, including protection measures for the public sewers.
16) Development shall not commence until there has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority a baseline TV/radio reception report that records survey data of the existing television and radio equipment signals in the locality. Following substantial completion of the proposed building shell, and prior to occupation of the development, a report to assess the impact that the development may have upon TV/radio signals in the locality shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. If the report identifies that there would be a significant adverse effect on TV/radio signals caused by the development then a detailed scheme for the mitigation of the adverse effect shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing prior to the occupation of the development. The approved scheme shall be implemented within two months of the approval of details or within any period of time agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall thereafter be retained.
17) Details of the external architectural lighting effects for the development (during the hours of darkness), including details of the siting and appearance of any luminaires, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local planning Authority; the architectural lighting shall be carried out as an integral part of the development and shall thereafter be retained.
18) A scheme for insulating the proposed houses and flats against external noise shall be submitted to and approved in writing with the Local Planning Authority; and the approved scheme shall be implemented in full before first occupation of the relevant buildings and thereafter retained.
19) The commercial ground floor units (for proposed shop use) hereby permitted shall be closed to and vacated of customers between the hours of 11pm and 7am (the following day).
20) No deliveries to the commercial ground floor units hereby permitted shall take place outside of the hours of 7am to 7pm (daily).
The reasons for the conditions are:
1) To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2) To ensure the development is implemented in accordance with the permission granted.
29 3) To deliver the requirements for affordable housing (in the absence of a S106 Planning Agreement) and the justification for balanced provision of on-site parking provision, to accord with policies DC40 and DC25/DC28 including the adopted Residential Parking Standards SPD.
4) In the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to enhance the built environment at this prominent site on the A2030 in accordance with policies DC1 and DC3 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
5) In order to ensure that the site is free from prescribed contaminants in accordance with policy DC21 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
6) In order to ensure that the site is free from prescribed contaminants in accordance with policy DC21 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
7) To improve the appearance of the site in the interests of visual amenity in accordance with policy DC1 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
8) To ensure that trees to be retained are adequately protected from damage to health and stability throughout the construction period in the interests of amenity in accordance with policies DC1 and DC14 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
9) In the interests of visual amenity, to define public and private spaces and enhance the safety and security of the site in accordance with policy DC1 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001- 2011.
10) To ensure that adequate provision is made for the storage of refuse and recyclable materials in accordance with policy DC9 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
11) To ensure adequate provision for and to promote and encourage cycling as an alternative to use of the private motor car in accordance with policies DC1, DC5 and DC25/DC28 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
12) To ensure adequate on-site parking provision for the approved buildings and to discourage parking on the adjoining highway in the interests of local amenity and highway safety in accordance with policies DC25 and DC28 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
13) In order to provide satisfactory access in accordance with policy DC25 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
14) In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy DC25 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
15) In order to protect existing drainage apparatus and to ensure adequate provision for foul sewerage disposal and surface water drainage from increased flows for the development to protect existing properties and land from any greater risk of flooding, to accord with policies DC1 and DC9 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
16) To protect occupiers of properties in the vicinity of the site from adverse impact on TV/radio reception in accordance with policies DC1, DC3 and DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
17) In order to secure the satisfactory appearance of this visually prominent development over a period of 24 hours that will ensure demonstrable townscape benefits both the existing built environment and legibility of the area, in accordance with policies DC1, DC3 and DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
30 18) To ensure that acceptable noise levels within the dwellings and the curtilages of the dwellings are not exceeded in the interests of residential amenity in accordance with policy DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
19) To protect adjoining and nearby residential occupiers from noise and disturbance late at night and into early morning hours, to accord with the aims and objectives of policy DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 and PPG24: Planning and Noise.
20) To protect adjoining and nearby residential occupiers from noise and disturbance (by delivery vehicles through the residential cul-de-sac of Wellington Street) outside of daytime hours, but especially late at night and into early morning hours, to accord with the aims and objectives of policy DC5 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011 and PPG24: Planning and Noise.
The reason for the recommendation is:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed redevelopment for housing and ground floor shops will not have a significant impact on the amenities of the adjoining occupiers in terms of loss of outlook, light or privacy, subject to safeguarding conditions. Furthermore, the proposed three- and four-storey buildings are designed to contribute to the streetscape of Winston Churchill Avenue and relate appropriately to neighbouring properties to the site and the surrounding area. The proposed on-site parking provision will be adequate to satisfy predicted car ownership for council-owned accommodation. The proposal is therefore in accordance with policies ST3, SP1, SP2, SP6, SP7, DC1, DC5, DC9, DC14, DC21, DC25, DC27, DC28, DC40, DC46 and DC47 of the Portsmouth City Local Plan 2001-2011.
Head of Planning Services 21 February 2011
31