Agenda item

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which made minor changes to the report.

The Committee heard two representations from residents in objection to the application. A number of points were raised and included: A two storey building which transformed into seven storeys was unwelcome. The design was an over development of the site and was excessive in terms of both height and bulk. The proposal would have a negative impact on the character of neighbouring buildings and the surrounding conservation area. During the demolition and construction phases, the proposal would create excessive noise and disturbance.

The proposal would generate increased traffic movements and parking stress. Further points included: The proposal would lead to a loss of light and overshadowing; loss of privacy and increased overlooking. The incorporation of a basement was excessive and unnecessary. Engagement with local residents had been flawed and there was no clear information on how the proposals complied with the council's policies. The proposal was unacceptable in planning terms.

The Committee heard a representation  in objection to the application from Councillor Zarar Qayyum, Ward Councillor for North End.

The Committee heard a representation  in objection to the application from Andrew Slaughter, MP.

The Committee heard a representation from the Applicants’ representative. A number of points were raised which included: The developer had worked on the proposal for four years which had included three pre-planning applications. The developer had submitted fifteen specialist reports and the design had undergone forty-one revisions. Should the proposal be approved, it would generate CIL payments and transform an existing ugly site into a contemporaneous one.

Further points included: The developer had consulted widely and addressed residents’ concerns, the design would enhance the local area and provide affordable housing.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including: The extent of the public consultation and whether this had complied with statute. The construction and eventual use of the basement element, the use of obscure glazing and ventilation to bedrooms. Further points included: The size and scale of the design and its context to other five storey building nearby. The implications of the proposal not having been considered by the Design Review Panel, what the split was for the affordable housing element,  parking considerations and the carbon offset payment.

The Committee voted on application 2018/01161/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendations of approval. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For:

1

Against:

4

Not Voting:

0                          

The Committee voted on a motion to refuse the application 2018/01161/FUL. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For:

4

Against:

1

Not Voting:

0

            RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2018/01161/FULbe refused for the following reasons:

·         That the proposal was an over overdevelopment and over intensification of the use of the site which resulted in unacceptable living conditions to future occupiers.

·         Due to the scale and massing of the design and its impact on the conservation area.

·         The impact on surrounding residential amenity and the loss of privacy to adjacent occupiers.

At the close of the item, the Chair adjourned the meeting for ten minutes to allow those residents who had attended the meeting to hear 4 Challoner Crescent to leave the Committee room. The meeting resumed at 8:45pm.