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. 

Mr Henderson (Agent), Mr Cluett (local resident/objecting) and Councillor O’Neill (Ward Councillor/objecting) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

Redevelopment of the site.  Demolition of existing buildings and construction a 3 bedroom detached house; a pair of 2 bedroom semi-detached houses; and a block of 7 flats (total 10 dwellings) with associated access, parking, gardens, bike and bin stores. (Outline application seeking approval for Access, Layout and Scale).

The presenting officer reported that Condition 18 should read:-

18. APPROVAL CONDITION - Means of site enclosure [Pre-Occupation Condition]

Before occupation of the development hereby approved, details of the design and specifications of the boundary treatment of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The submission shall include details of any raised boundary treatment along the northern boundary with 250 Priory Road resulting from raised site levels to provide safe pedestrian access and egress during a flood event and unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA the boundary treatment along the northern boundary shall comprise a brick wall. The agreed boundary enclosure details shall be subsequently erected prior to the occupation of any of the units provided under this permission and such boundary treatment shall thereafter be retained and maintained to the boundaries of the site.

The presenting officer further reported that an additional delegation, Recommendation 3, be made to the Planning and Development Manager:-

3. That the Planning and Development Manager be given delegated powers to receive amended/additional plans to show raised site levels to demonstrate safe pedestrian access and egress during a flood event. The amended/additional plans should include site sections to allow assessment of the relationship with 250 Priory Road.

The planning officer reported that under the Section 106 Legal Agreement, the head of term (ii) be deleted due to a change in legislation.  The Panel agreed a new Head of Term be added to read “Submission and implementation of a construction management plan to include details of construction vehicle parking and construction vehicle routing.” 

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

Reasons for Refusal

Insufficient family housing provision

The development fails to make adequate family housing provision by only providing 1 x 3-bed dwelling (with insufficient amenity space provision for a detached house) on a site capable of providing 30% of total dwellings (gross) as family homes.  The area is residential in character with a low to medium density and predominantly comprises family housing. No evidence has been put forward to demonstrate that 30% family housing would be unviable and, therefore, the development would be contrary to policy CS16 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (January 2010) in that it fails to contribute towards creating a mixed and balanced community.

Overdevelopment

The proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site by failing to provide sufficient private amenity space and parking to meet the needs of the development. The development fails to provide sufficient private amenity space for the housing within Blocks A and B which would be out of keeping with the spatial character of the area and would fail to provide an acceptable residential environment for future occupiers. Furthermore the proposal is considered to provide an inadequate amount of car parking for a development which includes 2 and 3-bedroom dwellings within an area of standard accessibility (as defined by the Council's Parking Standards SPD). Having regard to the existing take-up of on-street parking adjoining the site and in the absence of an on-street parking survey, taken with the likely amount of car ownership it is considered that car parking overspill from the development would impact negatively on the amenities of those living in Priory Road and adjoining streets.  The development proposal is thereby contrary to 'saved' policies SDP1 and SDP7 of the adopted City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) and policy CS13, CS16 and CS19 of the adopted Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010) as supported by the adopted Parking Standards SPD (September 2011) and Sections 4.4 and 5 of the Council's adopted Residential Design Guide SPD (2006).