Agenda item

Recommended for Approval.

The Head of Planning and Building Control recommended that in respect of application 3/18/1234/FUL, subject to a legal agreement, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report now submitted.

The Head summarised the application and detailed the relevant planning history.  Members were advised that the proposed development had been amended to 33 dwellings and the mix of 1 and 2 bedroom units was broadly being maintained.  The proposed parking had been increased and there had been changes to the proposed scale and bulk of the building.

Ms Rickards addressed the Committee in support of the application.  Councillor S Bull commented on the £500 per parking space included in the Section 106 agreement for improvements to pedestrian and cycle links.  The Head confirmed that it was not an uncommon approach for Section 106 money to be put towards pedestrian and cycle links should this application be approved by the Members.

Councillor J Kaye referred to the reduced potential for landscaping around the building to have a material softening impact.  He sought clarification on whether there would be visitor spaces or on street parking for visitors near to the site.  He referred to the comments of the Crime Prevention Design Advisor and the relationship between the C2 and C3 use classes.

Councillor J Jones commented that the number 18 bus ran close by to what was a much needed development in the form of quality retirement provision.  He emphasised the problems of contractor’s vehicles parking on Ermine Street.  He queried whether this could be controlled by conditions.

Members were advised that the alterations to the car parking layout did have an impact on the appearance of the site as more landscaping had previously been planned.  Officers considered that on balance the scheme was still acceptable despite the negative impact of a reduction in proposed landscaping.

The Head confirmed the parking provision was in line with the Council’s minimum parking standard of 0.5 to 1 space per unit and there was no particular provision planned for visitors, as this was not a requirement of the parking standards.  The applicant’s research had indicated a car parking demand per apartment of 0.45 per apartment or 0.55 when visitors were taken into account.

Members were advised that this site was accessible from nearby areas of on street parking.  Officers felt that the comments of the Crime Prevention Design Advisor were covered in the report submitted and all of the usual building regulations would be applied in respect of the use classes relevant to the proposed developed (C2 and C3).

The Head confirmed that Officers would consult Highways on information submitted in respect of the Construction Management Plan and wording could be added to condition 10 regarding the construction and storage compounds (including areas designated for car parking).  Officers confirmed that the proposed category 2 sheltered housing was covered by condition 4 as detailed on page 99 of the report submitted.

Councillor P Boylan commented on the increase in the state pension age and the 100% car ownership between the ages of 65 to 69.  He referred to increasing numbers of people remaining in work and being reliant on a car or commuting by car and then by rail.

Councillor D Andrews commented on access for refuse trucks and emergency vehicles.  He referred to there being no slack in the system and refuse trucks having to park a significant distance from bins.  The Head responded to a query from Councillor J Kaye by stating that condition 5 on page 99 of the report submitted covered a landscaping scheme that would control all of the details regarding hard and soft landscaping proposals.

Councillor S Bull proposed and Councillor M Allen seconded, a motion that in respect of application 3/18/1234/FUL, the Committee support the recommendation for approval subject to a legal agreement and the conditions detailed in the report submitted and subject to an amended condition in respect of construction parking.

The Head confirmed that Officers would not be able to insist on parking spaces being used instead of the highway for construction vehicles.  After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee supported the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control as now submitted.

RESOLVED – that in respect of application 3/18/1234/FUL, planning permission be granted subject to a legal agreement and the conditions detailed in the report submitted and subject to an amended condition in respect of construction parking.