A MEETING OF THE REGULATORY BOARD
WAS HELD ON 12 FEBRUARY 2002
The Mayor (ex-officio) (P); Chairman of the Policy and Organisation Board (Councillor Edgar) (ex-officio); Councillors Mrs Angus (P), Mrs Binfield (P), Farr (P), Gibson (P), Gill (P), Hayward (Chairman) (P), Langdon (P), Russell (P), Mrs Searle (P) and Taylor (P)
The Borough Secretary reported that, in accordance with Standing Orders, he had received notice that Councillor Russell would replace Councillor Edwards for the meeting.
Also in attendance: Councillor Rigg in respect of K.15658/1 - 242 Brockhurst Road, Gosport.
26. APOLOGY
An apology for inability to attend the meeting was submitted on behalf of Councillor Edgar.
27. MINUTES
RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Regulatory Board held on 15 January 2002 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.
PART II
28. REPLACEMENT OF HACKNEY CARRIAGE/PRIVATE HIRE PLATES ETC
Consideration was given to a report of the Leisure and Health Services Manager (a copy of which is inserted in the Minute Book as Appendix "A") which gave details of alternative plates and badges for hackney carriage and private hire vehicles and drivers.
The Leisure and Health Services Manager reported that the existing hackney carriage plates had been in use for the last 25 years and displayed the old Council logo and the designation of the Director of Environmental Health, a post that no longer existed. The private hire plates were replaced approximately five years ago and although both had a space for an expiry date to be attached, this had to be affixed manually and soon became illegible. In recent years considerable improvements had been made to the plates available, with new plates holding far more relevant information such as the vehicle registration, type of vehicle and expiry date.
The new plastic plates were produced via computer software which produced laser printed information that was then applied to the plate. The finished product was almost impossible to split apart or photocopy, however, if the plate were somehow split apart, the word 'void' was created by the hologram which therefore prevented unauthorised transfer to another vehicle.
The rear plate was not readily visible to potential passengers. This would be overcome by the provision of an internal plate fixed to the windscreen containing the same information as that contained on the external vehicle plate. This would enable a passenger to identify the vehicle should they have a complaint. Both the internal and external plates would require replacing each year as opposed to the current system where plates were issued on a permanent basis. New plates would also be required in the event of vehicle transfer.
The start up cost of introducing the system was £286 for the equipment with all other costs limited to the cost of materials as set out in the report. All costs were recoverable through the licence fee and, following amendments approved to the budget on 6 February 2002, the proposed and amended fee structure for vehicles and drivers was as follows -
| |
2002/3 proposed fee |
Amended fee |
| Vehicles |
£168 |
£196 |
| Drivers - Hackney Carriage or Private Hire |
£58 |
£65 |
| Driver - Combined Hackney/Private Hire |
£81 |
£88 |
| Transfer of a vehicle |
£0 |
£40 |
If adopted, it was proposed to advertise the changes at the new shelter at the taxi rank in support of the Gosport Crime Prevention Strategy. Indications were that a bid to the partnership for the necessary funds to do this would be successful. Whilst 'crime and disorder' money might be available to help with enhanced advertising of the new features, it was understood that this would not be available to help offset the cost of the new plates themselves.
RESOLVED: That -
(i) the replacement of hackney carriage/private hire plates and badges be approved; and
(ii) further investigations as to the costs involved be carried out and presented to the next meeting of the Board for consideration.
29. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING CONSENT
(NOTE: Councillor Mrs Searle declared an interest in respect of planning applications K.6778/3 - 13 Stoke Road, Gosport, K.5177/7 - 113 Stoke Road, Gosport, and K.15950 and K.15950/1 - 44 Stoke Road, Gosport, and left the meeting prior to consideration of the applications.
Councillor Mrs Binfield declared an interest in respect of planning application K.15970 - Mariners Way, Gosport, and left the meeting prior to its consideration.)
The Director of Development and Environment submitted a report on applications received for planning consent setting out recommendations in each case.
RESOLVED: That decisions be taken on each application for planning consent, as set out in Appendix "B" hereto.
30. INFORMAL SITE VISIT
It was noted that, for the benefit of Members who wished to take advantage of the opportunity, an informal site visit had taken place prior to the meeting in connection with application for planning consent K.15941 - Erection of two storey rear extension - 5 Falklands Close, Lee-on-the-Solent.
31. K.15658/1 - CHANGE OF USE FROM RETAIL SHOP (CLASS A1) TO HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY (CLASS A3) - 242 BROCKHURST ROAD, GOSPORT
Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Development and Environment in connection with planning application K.15658/1 relating to the change of use from retail shop (Class A1) to hot food takeway (Class A3) at 242 Brockhurst Road, Gosport.
It was reported that following public advertisement of the application, 15 letters of objection and 2 petitions of objection containing a total of 58 signatures had been received. The objections related to -
· parking issues
· additional vermin, rubbish, smells and flies
· worsening late night noise, possible vandalism and security problems
· no need for additional food outlets
· affect on property values
Environmental Health had been consulted in respect of the extraction flues and had responded that these were acceptable. Perceived nuisance was not an objection that could be supported or sustained. Too many food outlets in the area was not a planning issue but was a matter of competition.
With regard to the parking issues, it was reported that there was very little difference in the likely use of parking between the current A1 use and the proposed A3 use. In planning terms it was necessary to consider the difference between what was already authorised and the change in use. It was not considered likely that there would be any significant change in the number of people using the facility, particularly those using a motorcar.
Local residents were concerned about the availability of parking and, in this connection, it was reported that there were double yellow lines outside the premises and on the other side of the road. Illegal parking was not a planning issue but was a matter for the Police. Peak time for any A3 use was likely to be in the evening when parking spaces would normally already be occupied by the local residents.
In accordance with Standing Order 3.4, Mr M Weir of 26 Findon Road, Gosport, and Mr R T Sheard of 1 Elson Road, Gosport, were permitted to address the Board on behalf of local residents who objected to the proposal. Mr Weir made the following comments -
· Brockhurst roundabout was one of the busiest roads in the town and a bottleneck
· The layby outside the Video shop had one parking space
· The car park at the rear was merely used as an overflow for the car sales
· Where does the van park for home deliveries and where do the occupants living on the premises park?
· Children crossing to school will be a dangerous mix
· What would happen if the car park was removed and the Video shop became a car showroom?
· Local residents lives would be made a misery
Mr Sheard had the following comments to make -
· The BCM car lot had been extended to accommodate four more cars but there were already additional cars being accommodated on site
· Mr and Mrs Sheard were disabled pensioners who required 24 hour access to their property but it was likely that their access would be blocked by BCM. The problem was likely to increase with customers visiting the hot food outlet.
· There were already 28 food outlets in the vicinity of which more than half were within walking distance from his home. Was another needed?
· There was a real fear of hooligans as a result of living next door to the premises.
· According to a local estate agent, his property was likely to devalue by £10,000 - would the planning committee reimburse the loss?
In accordance with Standing Order 3.6.2, Councillor Rigg was permitted to address the Board on behalf of the local residents. Councillor Rigg made the following comments -
· Local residents already experienced problems with cars parking outside their properties.
· There was very little suitable parking in the vicinity.
· It was important to consider the late night opening hours and local residents were very concerned about late night revelry after closing time and the subsequent litter which will encourage vermin back to the area.
· Councillor Rigg drew attention to the Human Rights Act Section 1 Article 8 which stated that everyone had the right to respect to his or her private life and also to Sections 6(1) and 7(1) which entitled people to continue in their style which would be altered by approval of the current application.
Mrs J Barratt, as Agent for the applicant, was permitted to respond to the points raised. Mrs Barratt commented -
· The applicants had 10 years experience of providing takeaways, one of which was in Fareham and had the full support of officers there.
· There had been no problem with litter, noise or smell and Environmental Health were satisfied with the proposals.
· The premises was already classified as a shop and was, as such, able to sell cold food.
· There were two allocated car parking spaces to the rear of the shop which were not included with the original shop.
During consideration of this matter, Members raised concerns regarding the traffic congestion at this junction, parking and highway safety particularly in view of school children crossing. Having debated the matter at length, it was -
RESOLVED: That planning application K.15658/1 relating to the change of use from retail shop (Class A1) to hot food takeaway (Class A3) at 242 Brockhurst Road, Gosport, be refused for the following reasons -
01 The proposed use, which includes no provision for the parking and off-loading of vehicles within the curtilage of the site, would be detrimental to highway safety, and contrary to Policies BE1 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
02 The proposed use of these premises would be likely to encourage the parking of vehicles on the public highway which would interrupt the free flow of traffic within Brockhurst Road and Elson Road, adding to the hazards of road users at this point, to the detriment of highway safety, and contrary to Policies BE1 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
32. K.7688/3 - ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION - LEE HEALTH CENTRE, MANOR WAY, LEE-ON-THE-SOLENT
The Director of Development and Environment reported that planning application K.7688/3 relating to the erection of a single storey extension at the Lee Health Centre, Manor Way, Lee-on-the-Solent, had been included on the Agenda for the Board meeting in December 2001. However, it had been withdrawn for further negotiations.
A full highway parking survey had been carried out for a week in January which had revealed that car parking in the area was not totally occupied for the full extent of the working day and that there was some spare capacity. The present car parking arrangements had been redistributed and whereas the extension would have lost 11 parking spaces, parking had been amended to provide 40 spaces on site which was the same as at present. Two marked disabled spaces would be included within the provision.
Following public consultation of the proposal, three letters of objection and a petition of objection containing 121 signatures had been received. One letter of observation had also been received. However, as a result of the further negotiations, 64 signatories had withdrawn their names from the petition of objection and it was considered that, having resolved the parking issues, the original petition no longer had any substance. In addition, four petitions containing 274 signatures in support of the proposal had been received.
In accordance with Standing Order 3.4, Mrs A Roast, Deputy Chairman of the Lee Residents' Association, was permitted to address the Board in support of the application. Mrs Roast made the following comments -
· There was some satisfaction when the plans were submitted for an extension to the Health Centre in Manor Way and that plans were underway to accommodate extra doctors and staff to deal with Lee's growing population.
· Many residents of Lee could not believe that the petition had jeopardised an improvement to the facilities.
· The Residents' Association wrote to all residents inviting them to withdraw their objections and to date 50% had done so.
· The issue of car parking in any planning application was one that the Association took very seriously. However, it was now understood that the car parking spaces had been identified and urged that planning permission be granted to allow building to commence whilst funds were available.
Having considered this matter, it was -
RESOLVED: That planning application K.7688/3 relating to the erection of a single storey extension at the Lee Health Centre, Manor Way, Lee-on-the-Solent, be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Director of Development and Environment.
33. K.14094/4 - CHANGE OF USE FROM DWELLING (CLASS A3) TO GUEST HOUSE (CLASS C1) - 152 PRIORY ROAD, GOSPORT
Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Development and Environment in connection with planning application K.14094/4 relating to the change of use from dwelling (Class A3) to Guest House (Class C1) at 152 Priory Road, Gosport.
Members were informed that the applicant, who lived at 152 Priory Road, Gosport, had from time to time taken in lodgers and now wished to make the property a bed and breakfast. The proposal was to let at least three bedrooms to guests.
Following public advertisement of the proposal, two letters of objection had been received raising concerns on the following points -
· Possibility of multi-occupancy
· Inadequate sewer arrangements, previous blockages
· Limited parking facilities
· Increase in noise, suggest soundproofing
· Principle of a business activity within a Conservation Area
Parking requirements would be one per bedroom plus at least one for the owner's use; however only three spaces are provided for in the proposal. In addition, the proposal was out of character for the area and did not fulfil the criteria of Policy H10.
In accordance with Standing Order 3.4, Mr P Munden, the applicant, was permitted to address the Board on his application. Mr Munden made the following comments -
· There were not enough guest houses in the Borough and, therefore, there was a demand with the proposal being of benefit to the Town
· Rooms had been equipped with fire extinguishers, smoke detectors etc
· Rooms had been rented on a long term basis for several years
· The proposal was to rent two or three bedrooms although would be prepared to rent only two rooms if that was considered more acceptable
· The property is situated near to Explosion! and food could be provided in the Jolly Roger
Having considered the matter, it was -
RESOLVED: That planning application K.14094 relating to the change of use from dwelling (Class C3) to guest house (Class C1) at 152 Priory Road, Gosport, be refused for the following reason -
The proposed development would constitute an undesirable over-intensive use of the site which would be detrimental to the amenities of adjoining residents and the character of the area, contrary to Policy H10 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
34. K.15957 - REGULATION 3 - INSTALLATION OF INSULATED CLADDING SYSTEM AND REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TO COMMUNAL AREAS - HARBOUR TOWER, TRINITY GREEN, GOSPORT
Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Development and Environment in connection with planning application K.15957 - Regulation 3 - Installation of insulated cladding system and replacement windows to communal areas at Harbour Tower, Trinity Green, Gosport.
It was reported that the residents were being consulted on a choice of colour and this consultation had yet to be concluded. It was therefore proposed that an additional condition be added regarding colour.
RESOLVED: That planning application K.15957 - Regulation 3 - installation of insulated cladding system and replacement windows to communal areas at Harbour Tower, Trinity Green, Gosport, be approved subject to -
01 The development hereby permitted, shall be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans, specifications and written particulars for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason - To ensure that the development is completed satisfactorily in all respects, and to comply with Policy BE1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
02 Details of the colour scheme for the external facing materials shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby permitted is commenced.
Reason - To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory, and to comply with Policy BE1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
CHAIRMAN
|
|
