A MEETING OF THE REGULATORY BOARD
WAS HELD ON 12 MARCH 2002
The Mayor (ex-officio) (P); Chairman of the Policy and Organisation Board (Councillor Edgar) (ex-officio) (P); Councillors Mrs Angus (P), Mrs Binfield (P), Edwards (P), Farr (P), Gibson (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 Gill for the meeting.
Also in attendance: Councillor Burgess in respect of K.8594/4 - 49/51 High Street, Lee-on-the-Solent.
35. MINUTES
RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meetings of the Regulatory Board held on 6 and 12 February 2002 be approved and signed by the Chairman as true and correct records subject to -
Minute No 31 (page 19) being amended to read:
· Mr Sheard and his neighbour were disabled pensioners who required 24 hour access to their property but it was likely that their access would be blocked by BCM and the Video Shop. (second bullet point refers)
· There were already 28 food outlets in the vicinity. Was another needed? (third bullet point refers)
Minute No 34 (page 22) being amended to read as follows -
34. K.15150/3 - REGULATION 3 - INSTALLATION OF INSULATED CLADDING SYSTEM AND REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TO COMMUNAL AREAS - GARLAND COURT, FORTON ROAD, GOSPORT
Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Development and Environment in connection with planning application K.15150/3 - Regulation 3 - Installation of insulated cladding system and replacement windows to communal areas at Garland Court, Forton Road, 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.15150/3 - Regulation 3 - installation of insulated cladding system and replacement windows to communal areas at Garland Court, Forton Road, 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.
PART II
36. REPLACEMENT OF HACKNEY CARRIAGE/PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLE PLATES AND ASSOCIATED MATERIALS - FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
(Councillor Edgar declared an interest in this item and left the meeting prior to its consideration.)
Consideration was given to a report of the Leisure and Health Services Manager in connection with the cost of upgrading the existing system of Hackney Carriage/Private Hire plates and other identification media and the options for funding.
The Board, at its meeting on 12 February 2002, agreed in principle to the proposal to improve the existing plates issued to Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicles with plates produced by the Mogo Company but requested further information on the costs of implementing the system.
The cost of implementing the system based upon the existing number of drivers (296) and vehicles (122) with a small addition to provide for training, replacement and growth would be as follows -
|
Equipment |
Cost |
|
|
£ |
|
External Plates |
839.36 |
|
Internal Plates |
1007.72 |
|
Sub Total |
1847.08 |
|
Identification Badges |
994.56 |
|
Sub Total |
2841.64 |
|
Additional Materials (10 sets) |
185.00 |
|
Sundries |
334.00 |
|
Total Cost |
3360.64 |
It was reported that internal savings of £500 had been identified which, in addition to the £500 already allocated to the provision of plates, would bring the cost of providing plates for the first year down to £847.08. This represented an additional payment of £7 from existing vehicle operators on the existing fee for the year 2002-03. Drivers would be required to pay an additional £3 for identification badges in addition to the existing driver's licensing fee for the year 2002-03.
The introduction of an increased fee would still leave a shortfall of £519 for training, replacement and spare materials. However, some of these materials could be pre-purchased from savings in the current financial year. If fees remained as determined by Council on 6 February 2002, an additional £2360.00 would have to be found from savings. Savings identified in the current financial year would not be available in successive years and a comprehensive review of licensing fees for the years 2003-04 onwards would therefore have to be undertaken in order to recover the continuing cost of operating the scheme.
RESOLVED: That the increased costs of the introduction of the Mogo system of Hackney Carriage and Private Hire vehicle plates and associated materials be funded from one-off savings from the current financial year and the relevant fees for 2003-04 be increased to ensure the continued operation of the scheme thereafter.
37. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING CONSENT
[Councillor Hayward declared an interest in planning application K.14911/1 - 6 Seathrift Close, Lee-on-the-Solent, 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 "A" hereto.
38. K.8594/4 - ERECTION OF THREE AND FOUR STOREY BLOCK OF 34 NO SHELTERED FLATS, COMMUNAL FACILITIES AND CAR PARKING - 49/51 HIGH STREET, LEE-ON-THE-SOLENT
Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Development and Environment in connection with planning application K.8594/4 relating to the erection of three and four storey block of 34 No sheltered flats, communal facilities and car parking at 49/51 High Street, Lee-on-the-Solent.
The Director of Development and Environment reported that the applicant had submitted twin tracked applications for 3 and 4 storey blocks of 34 flats. They had appealed against non-determination of K.8549/5, leaving the duplicate application K.8594/4 to be determined.
In the Gosport Borough Local Plan the site was allocated within the principal shopping area for Lee-on-the-Solent and, although residential development conflicted with the Local Plan, it was not possible to justify the view that such a use would be harmful to the vitality and viability of the shopping area. In those circumstances it was acceptable to make an exception to the Local Plan. The site was well located close to bus services and local shops as well as to other similar sheltered housing developments.
It was further reported that the applicant had been advised in January that the design was unacceptable since when there had been no response other than to appeal for non-determination. Officers were therefore of the view that the applicant did not wish to negotiate and the remaining application should be determined.
The separation distances within the Local Plan were not met and, although the three storey development was appropriate to High Street, the four storey corner and return element to Beach Road resulted in an overbearing relationship with other nearby buildings. The Local Plan required 25 square metres of private amenity space per flat but none was being proposed. The proposed parking provision was inadequate and no affordable housing provision was included.
Following public advertisement of the proposal, 12 letters of objection had been received which raised the following issues -
· The site was within a high street principal shopping centre - the ground floor should be maintained for shopping use.
· The bulk of the development was excessive and visually obtrusive and would be architecturally overpowering on the corner.
· Car parking provision was inadequate.
· The proposal would prevent widening of the rear access road which was required to reduce congestion caused by lorries unloading in High Street.
· Loss of privacy by way of overlooking nearby residential properties.
· Loss of light by overshadowing.
· Loss of sea views.
· Likely noise, disturbance and damage to nearby properties during construction.
· Sewerage problems - existing infrastructure unable to cope.
· Reduction in property values.
In accordance with Standing Order 3.4, Mrs A Roast was permitted to address the Board on behalf of residents who objected to the proposal. Mrs Roast made the following comments -
· Residents were strongly opposed to the demolition of Lee-on-the-Solent's retail facility. The site was part of the principal shopping centre and the ground floor at least should be retained.
· The population of Lee-on-the-Solent was growing and it was felt that there would be an increase in demand for shopping facilities as a result. Every shop closure made it more difficult for others to provide.
· Car parking provision was clearly inadequate with Alver Quay being a prime example of this. Residents had cleaners, hairdressers etc who all required parking.
· The accessway was periodically blocked by lorries unloading and every opportunity should be taken to widen this and no buildings should be allowed to obstruct this objective.
· Twin applications had been submitted.
· The applicant's attention should be drawn to the Green Paper.
Mr Childs, the Applicant's Agent, was permitted to address the Board and made the following comments -
· With regard to the negotiations with the planning officers, further information was awaited which had only recently been received.
· The applicant tried to make the best use of sites such as these.
· With regard to affordable housing, it was very difficult to provide mixed tenure.
In accordance with Standing Order 3.6.2, Councillor Burgess was permitted to address the Board on behalf of local residents. Councillor Burgess had the following comments to make -
· Supported the three grounds for refusal as the application did not address the problem with parking and there was no contribution towards affordable housing.
· Lee-on-the-Solent was undergoing a dramatic change in population where more shopping facilities would be required, not less.
· The retail study commissioned for Gosport clearly showed the need for retail facilities in Lee-on-the-Solent and those recommendations should be followed.
· The Local Plan defined the areas for retail/commercial.
· Residential development should not be permitted.
During consideration of this matter, Members were concerned that there was no provision in the proposal for affordable housing having regard to the Council's policy of a 30% threshold where there were 25 units or above. Concerns were also expressed regarding the inadequate parking provision and the over development of the site.
Members were informed that since publication of the report to the Board, the applicant had responded indicating why affordable housing and amenity space should not be provided on the site and that he was not prepared to revise the proposals. The applicant had fought and won a number of appeals where affordable housing was an issue. It was therefore proposed that, if the application were to be refused on the grounds set out in the report, the officers should be given time to consider the new information relating to affordable housing and, if it was felt that it could not be upheld, consideration should be given to withdrawing that reason for refusal. A further report on the matter would be presented to the next meeting of the Board.
RESOLVED: That -
(i) planning application K.8594/4 relating to the erection of three and four storey block of 34 No sheltered flats, communal facilities and car parking at 49/51 High Street, Lee-on-the-Solent be refused for the following reasons -
01 The proposed development by reason of its excessive building mass would detract from the visual amenities of the locality and be detrimental to the visual outlook and amenities of nearby residential properties, contrary to Policies BE1 and H5 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
02 Development of the site in the manner proposed would amount to over development, in that provision of on-site car parking and amenity space is inadequate, contrary to Policies BE1, H5, H11 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
03 The proposal does not provide or incorporate a suitable contribution towards meeting the affordable housing needs of the Borough, contrary to Policy H7 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan; and
(ii) a further report be submitted to the next meeting of the Board relating to the third reason for refusal.
[The Mayor and Councillor Edgar left the meeting at 7.05 pm]
39. K.12263/12 - INCREASE TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTS FROM 25 TO 34 AT EXISTING REST HOME (VARIATION OF ADDITIONAL CONDITION 1 - K.12263/8) (LISTED BUILDING IN CONSERVATION AREA) - ST VINCENT HOUSE, FORTON ROAD, GOSPORT
[Councillor Russell left the meeting at 7.20 pm]
Consideration was given to planning application K.12263/12 relating to an increase in the total number of residents from 25 to 34 at St Vincent House, Forton Road, Gosport.
It was reported that one letter of objection had been received to the proposal which raised concerns regarding the traffic generation from additional visitors and required clarification of the reason for the application.
In order to ensure that the number of residents was restricted to 34, it was proposed to include a condition to that effect. It was therefore -
RESOLVED: That planning application K.12263/12 relating to the increase in the total number of residents from 25 to 34 at St Vincent House, Forton Road, Gosport, be approved subject to the following condition -
Not more than 34 residents shall be accommodated within the premises at any one time.
Reason - To protect the amenities of adjacent residents and to comply with Policies BE1 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
40. K.11743/1 - ERECTION OF BOUNDARY FENCE, MAXIMUM HEIGHT 1.4 METRES - 30 COOMBE ROAD, GOSPORT
Consideration was given to planning application K.11743/1 relating to the erection of a boundary fence, maximum height 1.4 metres, at 30 Coombe Road, Gosport.
The Director of Development and Environment reported that one letter of objection had been received to the proposal which raised the following points -
· Works had taken place without planning permission
· The fence caused loss of light and outlook
· Quality of the fence
· Underground sewer - contact with Southern Water
· House number obscured
· Security decreased
· Corner and footpaths boxed in
· Effect on property values
· Was fence going on top of the existing wall?
· Two fences along same boundary - maintenance problems and visual amenity
· Change in height from 1.4m to 1.45m
Members were of the opinion that the proposal was not in keeping with the visual amenity of the area given its prominent location and it was therefore -
RESOLVED: That planning application K.11743/1 relating to the erection of a boundary fence at 30 Coombe Road, Gosport, be refused for the following reason -
The proposed fence, by reason of its siting and height, would represent an unacceptable intrusion into the street scene in this prominent location to the detriment of local visual and residential amenity contrary to Policy BE1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
41. AMENDED PLANS IN RESPECT OF PLANNING CONSENT K.15752 FOR THE ERECTION OF A FIRST FLOOR REAR EXTENSION - 7 GILKICKER ROAD, GOSPORT
The Director of Development and Environment reported that, at its meeting on 22 May 2001, planning application K.15752 was reported to the Plans Sub-Committee. Deputations were heard both for and against the proposal and, having considered the matter, the application was deferred pending a site visit. The proposal for a first floor rear extension was subsequently approved by the Plans Sub-Committee on 19 June 2001.
The applicant had subsequently submitted amended plans for the extension moving it in from the boundary approximately 150mm to prevent any encroachment upon 9 Gilkicker Road. In all other respects the amended plans were the same as approved in June 2001.
Following consultation, two letters of objection had been received from the occupiers of Nos 5 and 9 Gilkicker Road which raised the following issues -
· Loss of light to the kitchen, dining room and first floor landing of 5 Gilkicker Road
· Objection to the size of the bathroom window and potential overlooking and loss of privacy
· Devaluation of 9 Gilkicker Road
· Loss of light and overbearing side wall to the extension adjoining 9 Gilkicker Road.
Members were informed that the first floor rear extension was neither inappropriate in principle nor uncommon on that particular estate. The relationship of the proposed revised development to that originally approved had been considered and was considered to be equally acceptable. The extension was considered appropriate in terms of its proposed location, form, scale, height and external appearance and did not conflict with Policy BE3 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
The question of the bathroom window had previously been considered and officers remained of the opinion that the condition imposed on the original consent which required it to be glazed with obscure glass and retained in that condition, to be sufficient to cover the privacy issue. It was felt that the amended proposal as submitted for a slightly narrower extension would not result in a detriment to the amenities of neighbouring residents and was consequently acceptable.
The Director of Development and Environment reported that it was hoped to present a report to the Board in due course which proposed a new Term of Reference whereby minor amendments and some minor applications where an objection existed, could be delegated to officers.
RESOLVED: That -
(i) the details for a reduction in width of the first floor extension at 7 Gilkicker Road, Gosport, as detailed on drawing dated 11 January 2002, be approved as an amendment to planning consent K.15752; and
(ii) a report be presented to a future meeting of the Board proposing a new Term of Reference to enable minor amendments and some minor applications where an objection existed to be delegated to officers.
CHAIRMAN
|
|
