Agenda and minutes

Planning and Rights of Way Panel
Tuesday, 11th December, 2018 6.00 pm

Venue: Conference Room 3 and 4 - Civic Centre. View directions

Contact: Ed Grimshaw - Democratic Support Officer  023 8083 2390

Items
No. Item

42.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting (including matters arising) pdf icon PDF 77 KB

To approve and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings held on 13 November 2018 and to deal with any matters arising.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: that the minutes for the Panel meeting on 13 November 2018 be approved and signed as a correct record.

43.

Objection to the making of The Southampton (Ocean Village - Barclays House) Tree Preservation Order 2018 pdf icon PDF 85 KB

Report of the Head of Service seeking approval to confirm The Southampton (Ocean Village - Barclays House) Tree Preservation Order 2018.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Panel considered the report of the Head of Service seeking approval to confirm The Southampton (Ocean Village - Barclays House) Tree Preservation Order 2018.

 

Peter Warren (agent) was present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

 

Officers informed the Panel that the Order had now been amended to state the numbers of trees being protected.  On being put to the vote the recommendation to confirm the Tree Preservation Order was carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED that the Panel confirmed the Southampton (Ocean Village – Barclays House) Tree Preservation Order 2018, with modification.

 

 

 

 

 

44.

Planning Application - 18/00968/FUL (Retail) - Former East Point Centre pdf icon PDF 459 KB

Report of the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development recommending that the Panel refuse planning permission in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address.

Minutes:

The Panel considered the report of the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development recommending that the Panel refuse planning permission for the above address.

 

The erection of a food store (Class A1) and a coffee drive thru (Class A1/A3) with associated access, car parking and landscaping.

 

Graham Linecar (Southampton Common and Parks Protection Society, objecting) Simon Reynier (City of Southampton Society, objecting), Debbie King (Chief Executive Officer Plus You Ltd, objecting) Mike Allott (Plus You Ltd, objecting)  Alan Williams and Rob Williams (agents),  Lee McCandless (applicant) and Councillor Streets (Ward Councillor objecting) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

 

The presenting officer reported that an updated highways management design had been received but, that officers had not been able to model the design before the meeting to ascertain whether this was an appropriate solution to traffic concerns.  It was explained that as a result the recommendation had been amended to delegate to officers the reasons for refusal.  In additional Panel members were informed that an objection to the application from the Council’s Open Space Manager had been received.

 

The Panel then considered the recommendation to delegate authority to refuse planning permission. Upon being put to the vote the recommendation was carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

(i)  to delegate authority to the Service Lead Infrastructure, Planning and Development to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below;

(ii)  to delegate authority to the Service Lead Infrastructure, Planning and Development to uphold, remove or amend Refusal Reason 01 (site access) following review of the applicant’s late highway submission (revised signalised junction) by the Council’s Highway Engineers; and

(iii)  to note that an extension of time agreement has been received from the developer until 9th January 2019 to provide additional time for the consideration of the late highway submission.

 

Reasons for Refusal

 

01REFUSAL REASON - Site Access

 

The proposal has failed to demonstrate adequate capacity for safe right turn movements out of the site without leading to severe obstruction to traffic flow on Bursledon Road, a main arterial route which has been identified by Highways England as requiring major improvements to improve traffic flow. Therefore the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on highway safety and the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe. Furthermore the proposed layout fails to provide direct pedestrian access from the north, because the site is being developed in isolation, with access for cars given priority over pedestrians. The development proposal is thereby contrary to policies SDP1(i), SDP3, SDP4 and TI2 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (2015) and CS18 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2015) and paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2018).

 

02. REFUSAL REASON - Poor Layout

 

This application and the adjoining residential proposal (Ref 18/01373/FUL) have not been developed comprehensively or master planned and as a consequence, the failure to provide access from the southern land parcel onto Burgoyne Road without agreement from third party land  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

45.

Planning Application - 18/01373/FUL (Residential) - Former East Point Centre pdf icon PDF 440 KB

Report of the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development recommending that the Panel refuse planning permission in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Panel considered the report of the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development recommending that the Panel refuse planning permission in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address

 

Redevelopment of the site to create 128 residential dwellings comprising a mixture of 21 houses (20 x 3 and 1 x 4 bed) and 107 flats (29 x 1 and 78 x 2 bed) with associated car parking, bin, cycle storage and landscaping.

 

Simon Reynier (City of Southampton Society), Cheten Chauhan (agent), Ricky Shagma (applicant), and Andy Meader (supporter) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

 

The presenting officer reported that an updated highways management design had been received for the site on the south- west land parcel but, that officers had not been able to model the design to ascertain whether this was an appropriate solution to traffic concerns before the Panel meeting.  It was explained that should the modelling show that the suggested measures were not suitable then granting planning permission for this site would make the site on the south-west parcel difficult to develop.  It was explained that the recommendation had therefore amended to delegate to the Service Lead Infrastructure, Planning and Development authority to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below.  In additional Panel members were informed that an objection to the application from the Council’s Open Space Manager had been received.

 

The Panel then considered the recommendation to delegate authority to refuse planning permission. Upon being put to the vote the recommendation was carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

 

(i)  to delegate authority to the Service Lead Infrastructure, Planning and Development to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below;

(ii)  to delegate authority to the Service Lead Infrastructure, Planning and Development to uphold, remove or amend Refusal Reason 01 (layout and access management) following review of the applicant’s late highway submission (revised signalised junction) by the Council’s Highway Engineers; and

(iii)  to note that an extension of time agreement has been received from the developer until 9th January 2019 to provide additional time for the consideration of the late highway submission.

 

 

Reasons for Refusal

 

01. REFUSAL REASON - Layout and access arrangement would prejudice the future development of adjoining land

 

The proposed layout and access arrangement would prejudice the development of adjoining land to the south. The planning application by ALDI Stores Ltd (Ref 18/00968/FUL) failed to demonstrate adequate capacity for safe right turn movements out of the site without leading to severe obstruction to traffic flow on Bursledon Road, a main arterial route which has been identified by Highways England as requiring major improvements to improve traffic flow. As a consequence, the land to the south requires access onto Burgoyne Road. Therefore, unless access can be secured over third party land (Highpoint Centre), the proposed residential layout would prejudice the remainder of the wider site from being developed because there is no opportunity for vehicular access connection onto Burgoyne Road. 

Furthermore, because the site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

46.

Planning Application - 18/01266/OUT - Rear of 90 Portsmouth Road pdf icon PDF 530 KB

Report of the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development recommending that the Panel delegate approval in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address.

Minutes:

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

 

Erection of 2x 3-bed detached houses, with associated parking and cycle/refuse storage (Outline application seeking approval for Access and Layout) (Amended description following amended plans)

 

Jerry White, Christopher Mansbridge and Julie Doncom (local residents objecting), Robin Reay (agent), and Councillor Payne (Ward Councillor objecting) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

 

The presenting officer detailed the numbers of responses to the application. It was also explained that the report had not shown that the site had a previous planning history.  It was explained that in 1985 planning permission for the land had been refused as the applicant had not included details in regard to access for the site or given details of indicative design and scale of dwelling so impact on character and neighbouring amenities.  The Panel expressed concerns relating the upkeep of the access way and the protection of bollards at the end of the access way leading to St Anne’s Gardens and requested that conditions be amended as set out below.  

 

Upon being put to the vote the Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment. The Panel then considered the recommendation to delegate authority to the Service Lead: Planning, Infrastructure and Development to grant planning permission. Upon being put to the vote the recommendation was carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED that the Panel:

 

  (i)  confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment set out in Appendix 1 of the report.

  (ii)  Delegate to the Service Lead – Infrastructure, Planning and Development to grant planning permission subject to the planning conditions recommended in the report, and the amended or additional conditions set out below, and either a scheme of measures or a financial contribution to mitigate against the pressure on European designated nature conservation sites in accordance with Policy CS22 of the Core Strategy and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

  (iii)  That the Service Lead – Infrastructure, Planning and Development be given delegated powers to add, vary conditions as necessary

 (iv)  In the event that the contribution/agreement in regard to point 2. above is not completed within a reasonable period following the Panel meeting, the Service Lead-Infrastructure, Planning & Development be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to comply with the provisions of policy CS22 of the Core Strategy and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

 

Additional and Amended conditions

Amended Condition

 

16. Access route improvements [Pre-Occupation)

Before the development is occupied, details of proposed improvements to the access route into the site, to include the following listed details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once approved the agreed details shall be implemented prior to first occupation and maintained as agreed thereafter in perpetuity.

·  Access: The main vehicular access of the un-adopted road with Portsmouth Road shall be widened to 4.8m for a minimum  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.