Agenda item

Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.

The Panel considered the report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address.

Conversion of existing building into five flats (two x three-bed, two x two-bed and one x one-bed) with associated parking and cycle/refuse storage.

Jerry Gillen – Highfield Residents’ Association and Russell Smith (local residents / objecting) and Councillor O’Neill (ward councillor / objecting) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

The presenting officer reported a correction to paragraph 6.1 of the report - to read ‘petition with 63 signatures’ and not 53.

With the consent of the Chair, the Council's Solicitor to the Panel commented on the barrister’s opinion as sought by the Highfield Residents’ Association (appended to the report) with regard to the decision of the Planning Inspector (dated 15.8.13 and also appended to the report).  The Solicitor to the Panel disagreed with that opinion and indicated specific examples of the evidence the Inspector had referred to and where they had exercised their planning judgement and reached, in his opinion, reasoned conclusions.

RESOLVED to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below:

Reasons for Refusal

1.  - Harm to the amenity of neighbours and character of the area

The proposed creation of five flats would result in a level and intensity of occupation, combined with a pattern of activity to and from the property that would be likely to harm the amenity of neighbours through noise and general disturbance and also be likely to exacerbate on-street parking difficulties.  This in turn would have an adverse impact on the character of this immediate part of the street, which is predominantly comprised of single family occupied dwellings, contrary to the Government's objectives to create stable attractive communities under paragraphs 7 (2nd bullet point), 58 (1st bullet point) and 69 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  As such, the proposed conversion of the property to one which would be multiply occupied by five dwellings with shared integral cycle store and common refuse facilities, and with inconvenient access to a relatively remote common garden space for three flats, would be contrary to the following policies of the Development Plan for Southampton:

Local Plan Review (March 2006) - 'saved' policies SDP1 (i), SDP7 (v), SDP16 (i), H1 (iv), H2 (iii) and H4 (i)/(ii).

Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010) - policies CS5 (1) and CS13 (11).

2.  – Parking Permit Restriction

In the absence of a satisfactory legal agreement to ensure that these flats will not seek access to parking permits to park in the neighbouring controlled parking zones; the Local Planning Authority considers that the scheme fails to mitigate against its direct impact and could result in overspill car parking taking place from the development, which would give rise to an unacceptable risk of serious inconvenience and danger arising from increased parking demand in Grosvenor Road.  As such the proposals conflict with the guidance contained in s.4.2 of the Parking Supplementary Planning Document (2011) and with the aims of Policy CS19 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy Policy (2012).

RECORDED VOTE to refuse planning permission:

FOR:  Councillors Denness, Hecks, Norris and Tucker

ABSTAINED:  Councillor Lewzey