Venue: Walton Suite, Guildhall, Winchester
Contact: Claire Buchanan, Senior Democratic Services Officer Tel: 01962 848 438 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The Chair made the following announcements:
(i) That the consideration of Item 7 (Walcote Place) had been deferred to an additional meeting of the Planning Committee on 23 September 2019; and
(ii) That, at the Chair’s discretion, the total amount of speaking time for objectors and supporters who had registered to speak on Item 8 (Land East of Station Road) had been extended to 15 minutes each.
Disclosures of Interests
To receive any disclosure of interests from Members and Officers in matters to be discussed.
If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.
Councillor Evans declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interestin respect of Item 8 (Land East of Station Road, Winchester) due to her role as the Council’s representative on the South Downs National Park (SDNP). However, as she had taken no part in their discussions of this matter thereon, she spoke and voted on this application.
At the invitation of the Service Lead: Built Environment, the Committee had visited the site relating to Item 8 on 10 September 2019, to assist them in assessing the proposal in relation to its setting. The site visit was attended by Members present on the Committee, with the exception of Councillor Pearson who stated that he was familiar with the site and would therefore take part in the discussion and vote thereon.
Minutes of the previous meeting held on 15 August 2019
That the minutes of the meeting held on 15 August 2019, be approved and adopted.
The Committee agreed to receive the Update Sheet as an addendum to Report PDC1144.
Item 7 below (Walcote Place, High Street, Winchester), - deferred from the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 15 August 2019. Further details of the item as set out in the Minutes of that meeting which are attached to this agenda.
Membership for the consideration of this item is drawn only from those Planning Committee members (including deputies) who attended the meeting of the Committee held on 15 August 2019 – Councillors as follows:
Chair: Rutter, Vice-Chair: Clear, Cunningham, McLean, Ruffell, Read, Bronk and Gottlieb (Standing Deputy Member)
A copy of each planning application decision is available to view on the Council’s website under the respective planning application.
Item 7: Single storey side extension to existing residential property.
Walcote Place, High Street, Winchester, SO23 9AP
Case number: 19/01205/HOU
This item was deferred to an additional meeting of the Planning Committee on 23 September at 10:00am in the Walton Suite.
Item 8: (AMENDED DESCRIPTION AND REVISED PLANS) (OUTLINE APPLICATION WITH ACCESS) Mixed Use development involving the erection of buildings up to 5 storeys from street level, a lower ground floor level and basement to provide up to 17,972 sqm of office (use classes B1), up to 1,896 sqm of mixed uses including potential retail, restaurant/cafe, bar and leisure uses (use class A1, A3, A4 and D2) and retention and refurbishment of the old registry office, associated car parking in basement (up to 95 spaces) and minimum of 156 cycle parking spaces and associated works.
Land East of Station Road, Winchester
Case number: 19/00601/OUT
The Service Lead: Built Environment referred Members to the Update Sheet which set out a correction to Condition 2 to read P0021 – Proposed vertical limits of deviation from AOD – section AA’ and advised that since the publication of the report, the following correspondence had been received:
A letter from the City of Winchester Trust; a petition signed by seven residents of Gladstone Street; an email circulated to Members from Councillor Gottlieb and one further letter of objection. The matters raised in this correspondence did not introduce any new material reasons to alter the recommendations set out in the report.
During public participation, John Beveridge (City of Winchester Trust), Rose Burns, Patrick Davies, John Hearn and Chris Higgins spoke in objection to the application and Sarah Davis (Winchester Business Improvement District (BID)), Alex Lifschutz (Architect, Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands (LDS)), Rachel Murrell (Planning Agent: Baron Willmore) and Ian Charie (Applicant for Winchester City Council) spoke in support of the application and all answered Members’ questions thereon.
The Chair reminded the Committee that correspondence had been received from WinACC raising objection to the application in respect of financial viability and transport blue print and also highlighted to Members its main objections.
During public participation, Councillors Tod and Hutchison spoke on this item as Ward Members, Councillors Gottlieb and Horrill spoke on this item as contiguous Ward Members for St Michael and Wonston and Micheldever respectively and Councillor Weir spoke on this item as Cabinet Member: Local Economy. In addition, Councillor Weir also incorporated a statement on behalf of Councillor Hiscock in his capacity as contiguous Ward Member for St Bartholomew as he was unable to attend the meeting due to personal reasons. All answered Members’ questions thereon.
In summary, Councillor Tod raised the following points:
- Comments in respect of height, mass, car parking and street frontages;
- Welcomed the improvements to the level of car parking and the reduced height of the building;
- Planning Committee had an important role in making its decision whether to approve this outline planning application;
- The scheme provided high quality office space but it was recognised this was not perfect and that planning conditions had been used to secure additional measures;
- Noted that consultees had expressed concerns regarding the height and massing;
- Residents of Gladstone Street had also expressed concerns;
- Queried if the Council would have ... view the full minutes text for item 7.
Item 10: Demolition of existing dwelling & replacement with 1 no. five bedroom dwelling
Minstrels, Uplands Road, Winchester, SO22 6ER
Case number: 19/01159/FUL
The Service Lead: Built Environment referred Members to the Update Sheet which set out an addition to Page 57 of the report to read ‘Recommendation: Application Approved’.
During public participation, Councillor Weir spoke on this item as Ward Member.
In summary, Councillor Weir raised the following points:
- Road made up of mostly bungalows with retired residents with an unadopted road causing problems for residents;
- There are concerns about this development and, if the Committee were minded to approve, it was suggested that a condition be added to ensure repair costs are met by the developer;
- Councillor Weir stated that she understood that one dwelling had been removed and sought clarification from the case officer on any intention to split the site.
In response to questions from the Committee in relation to private road access, the Planning Solicitor clarified that any concerns regarding access would be a property matter for the owners to discuss between themselves.
At the conclusion of debate, the Committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report and the Update Sheet.
Item 11: This proposal includes a two-storey extension to the existing dwelling on the south-west elevation, to provide extra lounge and bedroom accommodation and a single storey extension to the west elevation, to provide a kitchen/dining space. The scheme also includes an external double garage (amended plans)
Home Lane Cottage, Home Lane, Sparsholt, SO21 2NN
Case number: 19/00585/HOU
During public participation, Parish Councillor Sue Wood (Sparsholt Parish Council) spoke in objection to the application and Jon Walthoe (applicant) spoke in support of the application and all answered Members’ questions thereon.
During public participation, Councillor Horrill spoke on this item as Ward Member.
In summary, Councillor Horrill raised the following points:
- Thanked the applicant for endeavouring to find a satisfactory outcome with objectors but there were still concerns regarding this application;
- Much effort had gone into the development of the VDS for the village and Home Lane was particularly important to the settlement;
- Considered the design did not meet the quality of alterations expected within the VDS;
- Contrary to CP20 as the proposal did not conserve and enhance the historic environment through preparation of the conservation area;
- New development would be supported if it protected and enhanced the asset and the setting but this proposal was not considered suitable;
- Due consideration should be given to non heritage design assets at the design stage;
- Questioned that the extension met with Policy as it stands;
- Contrary to DM15 (local distinctiveness) – failed to respect the special quality of the conservation area, landscape or have regard to the cumulative effect on the character of the area;
- Urged the Committee to reject the application and recognise the need for a more sympathetic development.
At the conclusion of debate, the Committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report, subject to an additional condition requiring details of the window glazing to be used in the roof lights to be submitted for approval and an additional informative requiring construction traffic to be well managed to minimise disturbance to neighbouring properties.
Item 12: Use of land for storage of caravans/camper vans in addition to the agricultural use which would be retained.
Shady Oaks Farm, Durley Brook Road, Durley, SO32 2AR
Case number: 19/01415/FUL
The Service Lead: Built Environment referred Members to the Update Sheet which set out an addition to reason for refusal 2 to read ‘contrary to Policy DM23 of Winchester Local Plan Part 2 – Development Management and Site Allocations’ and outlined the details of an email received from the agent to Committee Members which raised point in support of the application.
During public participation, Kim Blunt (agent) and Jade Reeves (applicant) spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.
At the conclusion of debate, the Committee agreed to refuse permission for the reasons set out in the Report and the Update Sheet.
Item 13: Change of use of domestic swimming pool to commercial use
The Bungalow, Botley Road, Bishops Waltham, SO32 1DR
Case number: 19/00464/FUL
The Service Lead Built Environment referred Members to the Update Sheet which set out further correspondence that had been received: a consultation from Hampshire Countryside Service and a response from the applicant’s Transport Engineer; and an additional reason for refusal following the comments from Hampshire Countryside Service as follows:
‘The proposal use has a significant adverse impact on the amenity and recreational value of the path and the enjoyment gained from its use by the public in general’.
In addition, a verbal update was provided stating that additional wording be added to the reasons for refusal: ‘Contrary to Policy DM18 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 (access and parking)’.
During public participation, Parish Councillor Robert Shields (Bishop Waltham Parish Council), Ricky Fernandez (applicant) and Laura Skilton spoke in support of the application and all answered Members’ questions thereon.
In response to questions from Members, the Service Lead: Built Environment clarified that the Highways Authority had raised objection to the application as a statutory consultee, on the grounds of highway safety issues following consideration of a transport assessment which had been submitted by the applicant to support the proposal.
At the conclusion of debate, the Committee agreed to refuse permission for the reasons set out in the Report and the Update Sheet and the additional reasons for refusal to include ‘Contrary to Policy DM18 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 (access and parking), as set out above’.
1. That the decisions taken on the Planning Applications in relation to those applications outside the area of the South Downs National Park be agreed as set out in the decision relating to each item, subject to the following:
(i) That in respect of item 8, permission be granted for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report and the Update Sheet, subject to an additional condition that parking be restricted to commercial use for the development only, unless otherwise agreed in writing.
(ii) That in respect of item 11, permission be granted for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report, subject to an additional condition requiring details of the window glazing to be used in the roof lights to be submitted and an additional informative requiring construction traffic to be well managed to minimise disturbance to neighbouring properties; and
(iii) That in respect of item 13, permission be refused for the reasons set out in the Report and the Update Sheet and the additional reasons for refusal to include ‘Contrary to Policy DM18 of the adopted Local Plan Part 2 (access and parking)’.
(Report PDC1145 refers)
During public participation, Councillor Porter spoke on this item as Ward Member. In summary, Councillor Porter raised the following points:
- Tree overhanging into bowling club’s green next door and having an effect on the edge of the bowling green;
- Conscious this specimen of tree can grow to a substantial size and concern has been expressed that this could cause further damage as the tree increases in size with potential that this could adversely effect the foundations of the clubhouse in future.
That, having taken into consideration the representations received, Tree Preservation Order 2259 be confirmed.