Agenda item

Report of the Planning and Development Manager recommending that delegated authority be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address, attached.

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.

Provision of an additional floor on the existing residential block to provide six new two bedroom flats.

Mr Pettman (Local Resident/objecting), Mr Edwards (Banister Mews Residents’ Association/objecting) and Councillors Moulton and Parnell (Ward Councillors/objecting) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

The presenting officer reported a change to the recommendation to incorporate an additional clause to the Section 106 Agreement.

RESOLVED to refuse planning permission for the reasons set out below:

Reasons for Refusal

REASON FOR REFUSAL - Insufficient information on parking.

The intensification of the use of the site with no car parking to support it could, in the absence of an existing on-street parking survey to justify the proposed level of parking for the site, result in localised overspill parking from the development to the detriment of existing neighbours who are reliant on the street for parking and who would then face further competition for space and the possibility of parking further away from their homes.  The development proposal is therefore contrary to approved Policy SDP1 (i) of the Amended Local Plan review (2015) and the requirements of the Council's Approved Parking Standards SPD (2011).

REASON FOR REFUSAL – Over intensive use of the site.

Banister Grange is already considered to be a building of considerable mass and the addition of a fourth storey would add very noticeably to its bulk, particularly in views of the centre of its frontage. As altered it would look somewhat oppressive and un-neighbourly because of its height and scale. The increased density would result in an overdevelopment and over intensive use of the site, additional traffic moving in and around the site (both on foot and in cars) will lead to more noise and disturbance particularly to ground floor residents. The scale of such activity will seriously detract from the living conditions. As such the proposal is contrary to policies SDP1 (i) and SDP9 (i) and (v) of the Amended Local Plan Review (2015) and Policy CS13 of the amended Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2015).

REASON FOR REFUSAL  - Lack of Section 106 Agreement to secure planning obligations.

In the absence of a Section 106 agreement the development fails to mitigate its impact in the following areas:

(i)  Contributions  towards site specific transport improvements in the vicinity of the site in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (March 2006), Policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (2010) and the adopted SPG relating to Planning Obligations (August 2005 as amended).

(ii)  Obligations to preclude residents from obtaining parking permits for the Council’s Controlled Parking Zones.

(iii)  Submission of a highway condition survey to ensure any damage to the adjacent highway network attributable to the build process is repaired by the developer.

(iv)  Financial contribution towards the Solent Disturbance Mitigation Project (SDMP) in accordance with The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended).

RECORDED VOTE to refuse planning permission.

FOR:  Councillors L Harris, Claisse and Mintoff

AGAINST:  Councillors Denness and Lloyd