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.
Minutes:
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 dwelling to 2 x 5 person dwellings in multiple occupation (Class C4) with associated bin and cycle storage. (Copy of the report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes).
Mr Holmes (Agent), Mr Singh (Applicant), Mrs Baston on behalf of Mrs Foster, Mr Gillan (objecting) (Local Residents) and Councillor Vinson (objecting) (Ward Councillor) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.
The presenting officer reported an adjustment to Reason for Granting Planning Permission so that it should read:
The development is acceptable taking into account the policies and proposals of the Development Plan and other guidance as set out on the attached sheet. Other material considerations such as those listed in the report to the Planning and Rights of Way Panel on the 13.03.12 do not have sufficient weight to justify a refusal of the application. The proposal would make reasonable use of a very large property to help meet the housing needs of the city and would not have a harmful impact on the amenities of the neighbouring properties. Whereas Core Strategy Policy CS16 resists the loss of family housing, evidence from the housing waiting list suggests there is no demand for a property of this size from a single family. Also, it is possible that the applicant may revert back to Class C3 use for either unit, where the rearmost dwelling enjoys direct access to private amenity space. The Council’s emerging Supplementary Planning Document on Houses in Multiple Occupation is not due to come into force until 23 March 2012. Whilst it has formed a material planning consideration in the determination of this application, the sheer size of the property and the improbability of it contributing to the city’s housing need by being used by a single family has resulted in the local planning authority concluding its use as two Class C4 dwellings, each only occupied by five persons, is a reasonable use of the building, whose intensity of use would not harm the amenities of occupiers of adjoining properties. As such, the departure from CS16 is not considered to be so adverse to the planning of the area to justify the withholding of planning permission. Where appropriate planning conditions have been imposed to mitigate any harm identified. In accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, Planning Permission should therefore be granted taking account of the following planning policies:
'Saved' Policies - SDP1, SDP4, SDP5, SDP7, SDP9 and H4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006) as supported by the adopted Local Development Framework Core Strategy (January 2010) policies CS5, CS13, CS19, and CS20 and the Council’s current adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance. National Planning Guidance contained within PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) and PPS3 (Housing 2011) are also relevant to the determination of this planning application.
The presenting officer reported an adjustment to Reason for Granting Planning Permission so that it should read:
Amended Condition
05. Approval condition - Car Parking [Performance condition]
Before the use as two Class C4 dwellings, each only occupied by 5 persons, is commenced, a minimum of 3 car parking spaces shall be marked out on the site forecourt in accordance with drawing C11/111.405 Rev C. The utilities trench recently dug into the site forecourt shall also be maintained to match the original materials of the forecourt. The car parking shall thereafter be retained on site for those purposes at all times thereafter.
REASON:
To help meet the travel demands of occupiers of the two dwellings, whilst also defining/maintaining clear pedestrian/cyclist access to the property.
Additional Condition
12. PERFORMANCE CONDITION – Provision of rear door
Before the rear C4 dwelling is first occupied, the new rear doorway shall be provided to the garden area.
REASON:
To provide more convenient access to the rear garden from that dwelling, so as to reduce the use of the side access way, in the interests of preserving the amenities of adjoining neighbours.
RESOLVED that planning permission be refused for the following reasons.
RECORDED VOTE
FOR: Councillors Claisse, Cunio, Fuller, L Harris and Thomas
ABSTAINED: Councillor Mrs Blatchford
Reason for Refusal - Harm to the character of the area
1. The local planning authority considers that the intensification of residential occupation of the property from either family occupation within class C3, or from a C4 occupation by up to 6 unrelated persons, to occupation as 2 No. Class C4 Houses in Multiple Occupation, by 5 persons in each dwelling, would be an overdevelopment of the site and cause serious environmental harm. This would be contrary to policies of the Development Plan for Southampton (SDP7 (v), H4 and SDP16 of the Local Plan Review (March 2006) and CS16 (3) Core Strategy (January 2010). If granted permission, the proposals would prove contrary to the emerging Supplementary Planning Document on Houses in Multiple Occupation, approved by cabinet on 12 March 2012. The proposed use is also considered contrary to relevant advice set out in Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) – particularly paragraphs 9,13 and 49. It is also though contrary to paragraphs 19 (final bullet point) and 116 (first and fourth bullet points) of the consultation draft of the Draft National Planning Policy Framework. The harm from this over intensive use of the property would manifest itself in the following ways:-
(i) Disturbance to neighbouring occupiers from comings and goings to and from the site by 10 separate persons at various times of the day and night and their use of the garden at the property would not be compatible with the surrounding family housing; and,
(ii) Adversely affect the character and nature of occupation of this immediate part of the street, by causing the loss of a single family house, in a street predominantly comprised of family houses and making it more difficult for the local planning authority to resist similar proposals in this street in the future.
NOTE: Councillor Jones declared a prejudicial interest in the above item and withdrew from the meeting.
COUNCILLOR JONES IN THE CHAIR
Supporting documents: