Issue - meetings

Granted planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives as set out in the Committee report and supplementary report.

PROPOSAL

Demolition of one bungalow and various infill developments to deliver 21 residential units (Use Class C3) consisting of five separate developments of two terraces and three flatted blocks, with associated car parking, cycle storage, and enhancements to the Estate’s amenity space.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission subject to:

(1)      The Head of Planning being delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives as detailed in the report.

(2)      That the Head of Planning is delegated authority to make changes to the wording of the committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions, informatives, planning obligations or reasons for the decision) prior to the decision being actioned, provided that the Head of Planning is satisfied that any such changes could not reasonably be regarded as deviating from the overall principle of the decision reached by the committee nor that such change(s) could reasonably have led to a different decision having been reached by the committee.

(3)      That the Committee confirms that adequate provision has been made, by the imposition of conditions, for the preservation or planting of trees as required by Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

Neil Quinn, Principal Planning Officer, South Area Planning Team, introduced the report and set out the key issues. In introducing the report members were advised that the existing site comprised of a large residential estate, providing a mix of 2 and 3 storey flatted blocks, bungalows and maisonettes. The estate was not in a conservation area nor was it listed or in close proximity to a listed building. The proposed application sought the demolition of one bungalow to provide a net increase of 20 homes.

The Chair thanked Neil Quinn for introducing the report, as there were no Committee questions raised at this point, the Chair invited the first speaker Ms Deborah Eppel (objector) to address the Committee (in person) in relation to the application.

The following key points were highlighted:

·                Concerns were raised that the application failed to comply with national and local planning guidelines, including policy SPD1 and a breach of the 18m minimum separation distance, whereby some new properties would only be 14m away. It was felt this would create overlooking and was in conflict with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, which states that a person had the right to respect for their private and family lives.

·                The application breached BRE targets in the case of 50 Milverton Road and 12 flats in Clement Close.

·                The Committee report stated that the rooms impacted were 10 sqm kitchens and therefore were too small to be considered habitable. This was felt to be inaccurate as many of the 10 sqm kitchens doubled up as dining rooms.

·                The scheme was not policy compliant in terms of affordable housing provision.

·                Concerns were raised that the calculations used in the application were inaccurate, notably: the Urban Greening Factor (UGF) calculation, which was believed to be lower than calculated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5