21 06 2005

The Mayor (Councillor Burgess)(ex-officio) (P), Chairman of Policy and Organisation Board (Councillor Hook)(ex-officio), Councillors Allen (P), Carr (P), Champion (P), Clinton (P), Davis (P),  Farr (P),  Foster (P),  Smith (P), Taylor (P) and Train (P).

 

 

 

 

An apology for inability to attend the meeting was received from Councillor Hook.

 

 

 

 

There were no declarations of interest.

 

 

 

 

RESOLVED:  That the Minutes of the Regulatory Board meeting held on 24 May 2005 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record subject to Councillor Farr’s vote against being recorded at minute number 21, application K12725/3 – Change of use from shop (Class A1) and Takeaway (Class A3) to Takeaway (Class A5) - 152 Elson Road, Gosport.

 

 

 

 

It was reported that deputations had been received on planning applications K16926, K16930 and K6939/2.

 

 

 

 

No public questions had been received.

PART II

 

 

 

 

Consideration was given to a report of the Conservation and Urban Design Officer (a copy of which is attached in the Minute Book as Appendix ‘A’).  The purpose of the report was to request that the Board consider an offer of a Historic Buildings Grant totalling £268 (15%) towards a replacement front door to No.34 Crescent Road, Alverstoke, which is a Listed Building within the Anglesey Conservation Area.

 

It was noted that the copy of grant application was not included as an appendix but was available as background papers to the report.

 

 

In response to a Member’s question, the officer confirmed that the history relating to the installation of the existing front door was not known, that it was being replaced with a more suitable design appropriate for the building.  It was confirmed that the Historic Buildings Grant would be granted in accordance with Local Plan Policy (Policy R/BH3 Gosport Borough Council Local Plan Review, Revised Deposit, June 2004).

 

 

RESOLVED: That the Board approve an offer of a Historic Buildings Grant in the sum of £268, equal to 15% of the cost of works totalling £1,786.00 including VAT.

 

 

 

 

The Regulatory Services Manager submitted a report on applications received for planning consent setting out the recommendation in each case (a copy of which is attached in the Minute Book as Appendix ‘B’).

 

 

RESOLVED:  That the decisions be taken on each application for planning consent as detailed below:

 

 

38

K16932 - ERECTION OF 3no. ONE BEDROOMED FLATS AND CONVERSION OF EXISTING STORAGE BUILDING (REAR OF 20 AND 22 PERCY ROAD) TO TWO BEDROOMED DWELLING (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by letter dated 01.06.05)

 

Land at  24 Elmhurst Road  Gosport  Hampshire     

 

 

The officer advised of the receipt of one additional letter of objection identifying that the objector might own the barn structure and that his solicitor was checking the implications.  It was confirmed that this was not a matter for consideration by the Regulatory Board.

 

 

A Member endorsed the recommendation to refuse this application as it was considered inappropriate to build additional dwellings because car parking was already at capacity in this area.

 

 

RESOLVED: That planning application K16932 – Land at 24 Elmhurst Road Gosport  Hampshire be refused for the following reasons:

 

 

i

That the development, by reason of its location, design, mass and external appearance would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of Stoke Road Conservation Area and the visual amenities of the locality, contrary to Policies BE1, H5 and BE9 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and R/DP1 and R/BH1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

ii

That the development as proposed, by reason of its location, design, overall mass and orientation, represents an overdevelopment of the land available and as such would be harmful to the living conditions of existing and prospective occupiers, contrary to Policies BE1 and H5 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and R/DP1 and R/H4 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

iii

That the proposal does not provide, or incorporate, a suitable provision towards meeting the outdoor playing space needs of the Borough, contrary to Policies H5 and RL10 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policy R/OS7 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

 

39

K16926 - ERECTION OF 3no. 2 BED DWELLINGS AND REPLACEMENT GARAGE (as amplified by letter dated 16.05.05)

 

Land To Rear Of 12 Station Road  Gosport  Hampshire     

 

 

The officer reported that the Section 106 legal agreement relating to the payment of a commuted sum towards the provision and/or improvement of outdoor playing space had not been completed and it would be appropriate to amend the recommendation to allow more time to complete the legal agreement.

 

 

In accordance with Standing Orders, Mr Skraga was permitted to address the Board.  He advised Members that he was also speaking on behalf of other residents in Thamesmead Close.  He considered the proposed development would result in the loss of afternoon and evening light with consequent heat loss because the eastern elevation of the proposed development would be only 13 metres away from the western elevations of the existing dwellings; that the design and siting was detrimental to the character and appearance of Thamesmead Close, that there was frequent overspill parking and the provision of an additional drop kerb would add to parking congestion; that the immediate area was already highly developed and further dwellings would constitute overdevelopment, that the infrastructure was barely adequate for the existing dwellings and that building construction would cause severe disruption to the 22 properties in Thamesmead Close.

 

 

Mr Ayles of Latimer and Ayles Partnership addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant.  He considered that the planning issues had been addressed in the course of pre-application consultations and that the proposal would enhance the area.

 

 

In response to Members’ questions Mr Ayles stated the that the development met the current parking standards.

 

The officer confirmed that a traffic impact assessment was not required for this type of proposal and that maximum parking standards had been adopted to reduce car usage.

 

 

Members voted to defer further consideration of the application pending a site visit because of the contentious nature of the proposal.

 

RESOLVED:  That in view of the contentious nature of the proposal planning application K16926 – Land to the rear of 12 Station Road, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.

 

 

40

K14299/3 - ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING PARKING LAYOUT TO PROVIDE 2 ADDITIONAL SPACES (as amended by plans received 21.04.05)

 

21-33 Ham Lane  Gosport  Hampshire     

 

 

The officer advised that following a site meeting with the applicant and the Haven Wildlife Group, amended plans dated 16 June 2005 had been received to address the issues of landscape planting and the badger corridor raised in letters of objection to the original scheme.

 

 

The Ward Councillor confirmed that discussions between the residents and Portsmouth Housing Association had been successful and proposed the amended scheme be accepted.

 

 

RESOLVED:  That planning application K14299/3 - 21-33 Ham Lane Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:

 

 

i

That having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and all other material considerations, the development as proposed is acceptable in this location. It will not be detrimental to highway safety or the amenities of adjoining residents nor will it have a detrimental impact on the habitat supporting the badgers. As such the development complies with Policies BE1 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/T11 and R/OS12 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

 

41

K16930 - ERECTION OF TWO STOREY NEIGHBOURHOOD SHOPPING CENTRE COMPRISING 6 UNITS WITH 14 RESIDENTIAL FLATS ABOVE (as amplified by letter dated 01.06.05)

 

Land To East Of Twyford Drive  Cherque Farm  Lee-On-The-Solent  Hampshire   

 

 

The officer advised that an amended plan had been received on 21 June 2005 adjusting the schedule of flats in Block C to five 2 bedroom flats only.  An additional letter of representation had been received from Lee Residents’ Association requesting that the scheme include a landscape buffer along the eastern boundary, indicating that no boundary treatment details had been included and requesting the installation of CCTV.  It was reported that the reference to use as ‘medical and health services’ was classified as D1 and not D2 as shown in the report.

 

In accordance with Standing Orders, Mr Barker was permitted to address the Board on behalf of the objectors and referred the Board to letters of objection received from residents in that there had been a lack of consultation with them, as an example the shops in Priddy’s Hard had remained empty where anti-social behaviour appeared to be a problem, it had been suggested to residents at the time of purchase that only one store was to be built, there would be a loss of amenity in terms of traffic generation, noise, vibration, smell and pollution.  Other concerns included the overall height of the building, the position of extraction equipment; the service yard being adjacent to the boundary fence of 42 Megson Drive with resultant noise and air pollution and the principal concern was the possibility of a fast food outlet within the development.  Confirmation was awaited from the Local Planning Authority on the installation of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV).

 

In response to a Member’s question, Mr Barker confirmed that the developer’s sales staff had led purchasers to believe there was to be a single multi-purpose store.

 

Mr Hawthorne of White Young Green Planning addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant Highclere Estates, confirmed that CCTV with 24 hour surveillance was to be installed and that funding for two traffic regulation orders was to be provided to prevent parking adjacent to the site in Bracken Close and Twyford Drive.

 

In response to Members’ questions Mr Hawthorne confirmed that the service area was designated for use by the convenience store only and that boundary treatment details would be submitted for approval under the proposed condition of planning consent.  His clients were in detailed negotiations with interested operators for the shop units.

 

The officer confirmed that the Development Brief for Cherque Farm had indicated the site could be used for a single convenience store or a small number of shops, however this did not constrain future development only to those options.  Vehicle access was segregated from Bracken Close with double yellow lines being provided here and on site and that commercial traffic would use Twyford Drive.  Block A was two storeys in height, slightly higher than that of dwellings, the type of extraction equipment was not known because unit use had not been established, it would be located some distance from existing dwellings and this would be discussed with the agent during construction.  Details of boundary treatment for the southern boundary adjacent to 42 Megson Drive would be submitted at a later date, care would be taken to minimise the effect on residents and an ‘Armco’ barrier fence would be erected on the eastern boundary in addition to the existing 1.8m close boarded fence.

 

RESOLVED:  That planning application K16930 Land to east of Twyford Drive Cherque Farm Lee-on-the-Solent be approved, subject to Section 106 agreement relating to the payment of a commuted sum towards the provision and/or improvement of outdoor playing space, the payment of a commuted sum towards the administration and implementation of a Traffic Regulation Order, the payment of a commuted sum towards the funding of a CCTV camera installation within the development and subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:

 

i

That having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and all other material considerations, the proposal is acceptable in this location in land use and design terms and will not be harmful to the amenities of existing and prospective occupiers.  As such the development complies with Policies BE1, BE2, S1, S5, T5, T6, H5 and RL10 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/DP6, R/S1, R/S7, R/T2, R/T3, R/T10, R/T11 and R/OS7 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

42

K6939/2 - CONVERSION AND EXTENSIONS TO EXISTING PUBLIC HOUSE TO CREATE 4 NO. 1 BEDROOM AND 4 NO. 2 BEDROOM FLATS (as amplified by letter dated 01.06.05)

 

178 Brockhurst Road  Gosport  Hampshire  PO12 3BB   

 

 

The officer reported that six additional letters of objection had been received relating to loss of amenity and parking problems.

 

In accordance with Standing Orders, Mr Brooker was permitted to address the Board on behalf of the objectors.  He explained that he had no objection to proposals for the front of the public house but was concerned because of the lack of parking provision, loss of privacy, loss of light, lack of amenity space and the two storey element on the rear was overbearing.

 

Mr Crook of DPD Consultants (UK) Ltd addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant.  He  stated that the development had been designed as a sympathetic conversion of a building considered to be of local importance.  He said that the parking requirement for the public house use was greater than that of the proposed development and that it had not been possible to establish the ownership of the triangle of land to the south which had been used by customers of the public house so it could not be included as part of the application site.  He advised that the developer would be prepared to obscure the lower half of first floor windows on the rear elevation to prevent overlooking of the houses to the east in Beryl Avenue.

 

In response to Members’ questions the officer explained that the proposal would result in a net gain of seven flats (as one already existed in the public house) for the purposes of calculating the commuted sum required for the provision of outdoor playing space within the Borough; that overlooking was not an issue where properties were located either side of a highway or public space and that the officers were of the opinion that lack of parking provision would not have a detrimental impact on highway safety. The Borough Solicitor confirmed that proof of ownership of land was not always available or registered with the Land Registry.

 

Members debated the issues raised by the objectors including parking and amenity space provision and overlooking and proposed that the Head of Development Control be authorised to word the additional condition relating to the installation of obscure glazing the lower half of the first floor windows on the east elevation.  A vote in favour of the recommendation was carried.  Councillors Carr and Smith wished it to be recorded that they voted against the recommendation.

 

RESOLVED:  That planning application K6939/2 – 178 Brockhurst Road Gosport be approved subject to Section 106 agreement relating to the payment of a commuted sum towards the provision and/or improvement of outdoor playing space, subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager for the following reason and subject to the following additional condition:

 

Additional Condition:

The four windows on the first floor east elevation facing Beryl Avenue shall be glazed with obscure glass and shall be retained in that condition.

 

 

Reason:

To preserve the amenity of the adjoining properties, and to comply with Policies BE1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and R/DP1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

 

i

Reason for approval:

That having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and all other material considerations, the development as proposed is acceptable in this location. It will ensure the retention of a Local List building and its architectural character and will not have any significant detrimental impact on the amenities of the area, adjoining and prospective residents or highway safety. As such the proposal complies with Policies BE1, BE3, BE14, H5, T6 and RL10 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/DP7, R/BH5, R/T11 and R/OS7 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

 

43

K16938 - GPD PART 24 CONSULTATION - ERECTION OF 12 METRE HIGH MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS MAST WITH ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT CABINET

 

Land At Quay Lane  Gosport       

 

 

The officer referred to the report and confirmed that the proposal was for a ‘A single equipment cabinet is to be located adjacent to the foot of the mast’.

 

 

Councillor Farr wished it to be recorded that he voted against the recommendation.

 

 

RESOLVED:  That planning application K16938 – Land at Quay Lane  Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager for the following reason:

 

 

i

That having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and all other material considerations, the development as proposed is acceptable in this location and as such complies with Policies BE1 and CF8 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1 and R/ENV9 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

 

44

K9604/3 - CHANGE OF USE (RETROSPECTIVE) OF PROPERTY AS GUEST HOUSE (CLASS C1) (as amended by letter dated 16.05.05)

 

18 Russell Road  Lee-On-The-Solent  Hampshire  PO13 9HP   

 

RESOLVED: That planning application K9604/3 – 18 Russell Road Lee-on-the-Solent be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager for the following reason:

 

 

i

That having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and all other material considerations, the use can be accommodated within this building without any detriment to the visual amenities of the area and will not adversely affect the residential amenities of neighbouring residents.  As such, the proposal complies with Policies BE1, H10 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/H6, R/CF11 and R/T11 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

45

K2113/5 - ERECTION OF TWO STOREY FRONT EXTENSION AND ATTACHED DOUBLE GARAGE

 

32 Solent Way  Gosport  Hampshire  PO12 2NS   

 

 

RESOLVED: That planning application K2113/5 – 32 Solent Way Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager for the following reason:

 

 

i

That having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and all other material considerations, the development as proposed is acceptable in this location. It is of an acceptable design and will not be detrimental to highway safety or the amenities of adjoining residents. As such the development complies with Policies BE1, BE3 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/DP7 and R/T11 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.

 

 

46

ANY OTHER ITEMS

 

 

There were no further items to discuss.