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.

External alterations to facilitate conversion of existing private members club into retail (class A1) on ground floor and four x two bed flats on first and second floor, with roof terraces, parking and cycle/refuse storage.

Councillors Moulton and Shields(Ward Councillors/objecting), Ms Dineen (Local Resident/objecting) and Mr Beavan (Applicant) were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

The presenting officer reported an amendment to Condition 11 and an additional paragraph to Recommendation 1 set out in the report as detailed below:

Changes to Recommendation

Add paragraph in bold below under the following section of the report;

In the event that the legal agreement is not completed within two months of date of the decision the Planning and Development Manager be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.

In the event that an amended plan detailing the species, planting density and height of hedging to be installed with a commitment to ongoing management is not submitted and approved within two months of date of the decision the Planning and Development Manager be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.

Amended Condition

APPROVAL CONDITION - No other windows or doors other than approved [Performance Condition]

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 as amended (or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order), no windows, doors or other openings including roof windows or dormer windows other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be inserted in the development hereby permitted without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason:

To protect the amenities of the adjoining residential properties.

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

Reasons for Refusal

REASON FOR REFUSAL – Highway Safety

The location of the proposed convenience store close in proximity to a school

would add to Highway congestion at busy times, likely to result in risk to

 highway safety. As such the proposal is contrary to policies SDP1(i), SDP4,

SDP11 and TI2 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (as amended

 2015) and policy CS19 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (as amended

 2015).

REASON FOR REFUSAL - Lack of Section 106 or unilateral undertaking

to secure planning obligations.

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

(i)   Financial contributions towards site specific transport contributions for highway improvements in the vicinity of the site, including any necessary Traffic Regulation Orders to facilitate any changes, in line with Policy SDP4 of the City of Southampton Local Plan Review (as amended 2015), policies CS18 and CS25 of the adopted LDF Core Strategy (as amended 2015) and the adopted SPD relating to Planning Obligations (September 2013);

(ii)  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.

(iii)  Financial contributions towards Solent Disturbance Mitigation in accordance with policy CS22 (as amended 2015) of the Core Strategy and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

(iv)  The submission, approval and implementation of (i) a Construction Traffic Management Plan and (ii) post Construction Servicing Management Plan setting out the delivery times and other measures to prevent conflicts with neighbouring users of the road network so as to mitigate against the impact of development accordance with policy CS18 and CS25 of the Core Strategy (as amended 2015) and the Planning Obligations SPD (September 2013).

This reason for refusal could be resolved when an acceptable scheme is

presented to the Local Planning Authority