Agenda item

Report of the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development recommending that conditional approval be granted in respect of an application for a proposed development at the above address.

The Panel considered the report of the Service Head, Planning, Infrastructure and Development Manager recommending that authority to grant conditional approval in respect of the application for a proposed development at the above address.

Erection of a 2 storey building containing 4 x 1 bed maisonettes with access from Wimpson Gardens and associated parking and cycle/refuse storage

Kevin Liles, Denise Wyatt (local residents objecting), and Matt Holmes (agent), were present and with the consent of the Chair, addressed the meeting.

The presenting officer reported some late correspondence from a Ward Councillor detailing their objection to the application. In addition the presenting officer updated the Panel with amendments to the proposed conditions set out within the report.  It was explained adjustments were required to condition 5 relating to bin storage and that an additional condition would be required in relation to glazing. 

On being put to the vote the officer recommendation to delegate approval to the Service Lead, Planning, Infrastructure and Development was LOST, with the use of the Chairs casting vote. 

A further motion proposed by Councillor L Harris and supported by Councillor Denness to refuse the application was then put to the vote. 

RECORDED VOTE to refuse planning permission

FOR:  Councillors Claisse, Denness, L Harris

AGAINST:  Councillor Coombs

ABSTAINED:  Councillors Barnes-Andrews, Hecks and Mintoff 

RESOLVED that conditional planning permission be refused for the reasons set out below:

1. Overdevelopment and harm to the character of area

The redevelopment of the site in the manner proposed, due to the proposed footprint and hard surfacing, would result in a combined building footprint and hardstanding area (including parking and circulation) exceeding 50% of the site coverage and, therefore, will represent an overdevelopment of the site. Furthermore, due to the siting of the proposal, the scheme would fail to provide sufficient useable amenity space, exacerbated by the tree coverage on the adjacent sites and its north facing position, to serve all residents. Additionally, car parking arising from the development could have a detrimental impact on the amenity of nearby residents. Consequently, the proposal is contrary to Policies SDP1, SDP7 and SDP9 of the Adopted City of Southampton Local Plan (2015), Policies CS5 and CS13 of the adopted Southampton Core Strategy (2015) and the relevant sections of the Council's Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (September 2006) especially Parts 2, 3 and 4.

2. Lack of Section 106 or unilateral undertaking to secure planning obligations.

In the absence of either a completed Section 106 legal agreement or unilateral undertaking to support the development the application fails to mitigate against its wider direct impact with regards to the additional pressure that further residential development will place upon the Special Protection Areas of the Solent Coastline.  Failure to secure mitigation towards the 'Solent Disturbance Mitigation Project' in order to mitigate the adverse impact of new residential development (within 5.6km of the Solent coastline) on internationally protected birds and habitat is contrary to Policy CS22 of the Council's adopted LDF Core Strategy as supported by the Habitats Regulations.