Agenda item

Demolition of existing garage block and construction of detached building to accommodate new management office accommodation above replacement parking spaces.

Recommendation: Refusal had an Appeal against Non-Determination not been received

RESOLVED:

1.    That delegated authority be granted to the Deputy Director of Planning and Regeneration, in consultation with the Chairman and Labour Lead, to draft an informative, in the event of a re-submission, regarding the provision of allocated parking spaces / disabled parking for residents; and

2.    That the application be refused.  

Demolition of existing garage block and construction of detached building to accommodate new management office accommodation above replacement parking spaces

Officers introduced the application which was recommended for refusal. It was considered that the proposed development would cause significant harm to the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and their associated external amenity space in terms of loss of light, loss of outlook, overshadowing and overbearing impact.

A written submission in objection to the application was read out to the Committee Members on behalf of petitioners. Key points highlighted included:

·       Petitioners had concerns regarding the proximity, size, scale, bulk, height, massing, overdevelopment, increased noise, pollution and loss of the bin storage area;

·       The development would result in loss of privacy to all 12 flats in Neyland Court and the neighbouring properties in Pembroke Road and Brickwall Lane;

·       The proposed office building would block sunlight to all flats and surrounding gardens which would impact on the mental health of residents;

·       The proposed development would be incongruous and over dominant and would have a detrimental impact on the character, outlook and appearance of the site and surrounding area which bordered a listed area of special local character. It would be the 3^rd such office building in a small area;

·       The application suggested the development would be identical in form and materials to Neyland Court i.e. brick built, but the pictures confirmed it would be a steel frame covered in chip board and finished with a brick look cladding;

·       The current bin storage area for Neyland Court residents would be demolished with no plan to replace it;

·       There would be increased movement of vehicles to and from the site adding to noise pollution and disturbance;

·       Overdevelopment of the land could be a surface water flood risk;

·       If approved, a condition was requested to ensure the building could not be converted to residential space in the future;

·       There was low demand for office space in Pembroke Road and it was likely this trend would continue;

·       The application had failed to provide accurate measurements and drawings – a few drawings had been submitted after the consultation period had expired therefore residents had been unable to comment further on these.

A written submission on behalf of the applicant was read out to the Committee and photos relating to an approved 2015 application in the vicinity of the application site were shown to the Committee. The applicant stated that all Anslip (UK) Ltd applications in the last 10 years had been rejected by Mr James Rodger and subsequently granted at appeal. Planning Committee Members were invited to visit the site to see the impact of the proposal on surrounding properties. Members were requested to consider similarities to a previous planning application reference 21000/APP/2015/3095 at Pembroke Lodge which had been approved. It was vital that all applications were considered fairly and without bias.

The differences between the cited application and the current one before Members were pointed out by officers noting that the 2015 application had resulted in no impact on amenity space and there had been no issues regarding overlooking windows. The two were therefore not comparable.

Ward Councillor Philip Corthorne addressed the Committee on behalf of local residents and in objection to the application. Cllr Corthorne expressed concern regarding the size and scale of the proposal and its impact on local residents. He felt it was regrettable that previous Planning Inspectorate decisions had limited the Council’s grounds for sustainable objections. Councillor Corthorne raised concerns regarding the possibility of the office space being used as future residential accommodation and noted the lack of proposed bin storage at the application site. It was noted that the proximity to adjoining properties, bulk, size and massing were all matters of concern and were at odds with planning policies.

The Deputy Director of Planning and Regeneration informed Members that the applicant’s claim that all refusal decisions at the Pembroke House site had been overturned at appeal was inaccurate; an appeal in 2017 had been dismissed. It was however true to say that more appeals had been allowed than dismissed regarding said site.

The Chairman requested that, in future, petitioners refrain from criticising officers or making accusations about members of staff. It was confirmed that the Council had an official complaints procedure which should be followed in such cases.

Members expressed concern that the offices could be converted into residential accommodation in the future. The lack of allocated parking for the offices was another area of concern as was the lack of spaces for those with disabilities.

At the request of the Committee, it was agreed that delegated authority be granted to the Deputy Director of Planning and Regeneration, in consultation with the Chairman and Labour Lead, to draft an informative, in the event of a re-submission, regarding the provision of allocated / disabled parking spaces for residents.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed, subject to the addition of an informative in relation to allocated / disabled parking.

RESOLVED:

1.    That delegated authority be granted to the Deputy Director of Planning and Regeneration, in consultation with the Chairman and Labour Lead, to draft an informative, in the event of a re-submission, regarding the provision of allocated parking spaces / disabled parking for residents; and

2.    That the application be refused.