Agenda item

Report of the Interim Head of Planning and Economic Development recommending that the Panel delegate approval in respect of applications for proposed development at the above address.

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

20/01716/FUL - Change of use of existing offices (use class B1) to form mixed use event spaces and wedding venue (sui generis) and 7 no. hotel guest bedrooms (use class C1) (Submitted in conjunction with 20/01717/LBC).

20/01717/LBC - Listed Building Consent sought for conversion of existing offices (use class B1) to form mixed use event spaces and wedding venue (sui generis) and 7 no. hotel guest bedrooms (use class C1) (Submitted in conjunction with 20/01716/FUL)

Ron Williamson (local resident objecting) Simon Reynier (City of Southampton Society) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.  In addition, statements from the Andy Gravell from Local Residents’ group and from Professor Elia and Dr Elia were received and circulated to the Panel and posted online.

The presenting officer reported that the recommendation needed to be amended to include a Habitats Regulation Assessment.  It was noted that the HRA had been circulated to Panel separately.  It was further explained that the officers also required that the Section 106 legal agreement to be amended to secure both a contribution towards the New Forest National Park Authority Habitat Mitigation Scheme and site-specific highway works.  The presenting officer also proposed the amendment of Condition 9 and an additional condition relating to landscaping. 

Upon being put to the vote the Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment.

The Panel then considered the recommendations for each aspect of the development.  

Upon being put to the vote the recommendation relating to the Listed Building Consent ( 20/01717/LBC ) was carried. Councillor Savage abstained.

Upon being put to the vote the amended recommendation for application number 20/01716/FUL was lost unanimously.

A further motion to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below was then proposed by Councillor Windle and seconded by Councillor Harris was then carried unanimously.

RESOLVED that the Panel:

20/01717/LBC – Listed Building Consent

That planning permission be approved subject to the conditions set out within the report.

20/01716/FUL

RESOLVED

(i)  To confirm the Habitats Regulation Assessment.

(ii)  To refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below:

Reasons for Refusal

1)  Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate appropriate management of the site and the intended use, particularly, whilst ‘events’ are taking place, including details of booking systems, the type and number of on-site staffing, security arrangements including guest safety and controls for dealing with neighbour complaints and the termination of the ‘event’ at a reasonable hour, servicing arrangements including the storage and collection of food waste, recycling and laundry and the arrangements for catering in the absence of any substantial cooking facilities. These issues run to the heart of the use and it’s acceptability, and cannot be addressed with a post permission planning condition. Furthermore, without these details and a more refined definition of the likely ‘events’ the true impacts of the use cannot be properly assessed, controlled and mitigated.  In the absence of this information, the proposals could result in undue noise and disturbance to neighbouring properties alongside wider public safety concerns. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved Policies SDP1 (i), SDP16 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (adopted 2006 – amended 2015) and saved Policy CS13 of the Council's Local Development Framework - Core Strategy Development Plan Document (adopted 2010 – amended 2015), as supported by Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2)  In the absence of a completed Section 106 Legal Agreement, the proposals fail to mitigate against their direct impacts and do not, therefore, satisfy the provisions of Policy CS25 of the adopted Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2015) as supported by the Council's Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (2013) in the following ways:-

(i)  Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site and a Travel Plan, in line with Policy SDP1, SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (as amended 2015), policies CS18, CS19 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (as amended 2015) and the adopted SPD relating to Planning Obligations (September 2013)

(ii)  Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer.

(iii)  In the absence of an alternative arrangement the lack of a financial contribution towards New Forest National Park Authority Habitat Mitigation Scheme in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended), SDP12 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (Amended 2015), CS22 of the Core Strategy (Amended 2015) and the Planning Obligations SPD (September 2013) as supported by the current Habitats Regulations.

(iv)  Financial contributions towards Late Night Community Safety Facilities and CCTV in line with Policy SDP1 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (Amended 2015), Policy CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (Amended 2015) and Policy AP8 of the City Centre Action Plan and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended).

(v)  In the absence of a commitment towards a staff and guest travel plan the development fails to assist the Development Plan in delivering a scheme that encourages more sustainable transport to the private car.

(vi)  In the absence of a commitment towards CCTV the scheme fails to offer sufficient site security for the intended use.