Agenda and minutes

To receive any disclosure of interests from Members and Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note: Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests, personal and/or prejudicial interests, and on Predetermination or Bias in accordance with legislation and the Council’s Code of Conduct.

If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.

Councillor Laming declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in respect of item 9 (The Garden House, Southdown Road, Shawford – case number 20/01589/FUL) due to his role as a Ward Member. He took part in the discussion and vote thereon.

Councillor Evans declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in respect of item 11 (16 Cold Harbour Close, Wickham – case number: 20/02156/HOU) due to her role as a Ward Member and Wickham Parish Councillor. In addition, Councillor Evans stated that John Farrow, speaking in objection to the application, had invited her to view the proposal from his garden, which she attended following the Government’s social distance guidelines with Councillor Clear and in the absence of Mr Farrow. Councillor Evans stated that she had taken no part in any discussions during or after the visit, nor in the Parish Council’s objection to the application and therefore took part in the consideration of this item and voted thereon.

Councillor Clear declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in respect of item 11 (16 Cold Harbour Close, Wickham – case number: 20/02156/HOU) due to her role as a Ward Member and Chair of Wickham Parish Council. In addition, Councillor Clear stated that John Farrow, speaking in objection to the application, had invited her to view the proposal from his garden, which she attended following the Government’s social distance guidelines with Councillor Evans and in the absence of Mr Farrow. Councillor Clear stated that she had taken no part in any discussions during or after the visit, nor in the Parish Council’s objection to the application and therefore took part in the consideration of this item and voted thereon.

Councillor Ruffell declared a prejudicial interest in respect of item 13 (Manor House, High Street, Meonstoke – case number: SDNP/20/05327/TCA) as he was a close associate of the applicant and a fellow Ward Member for Upper Meon Valley. Councillor Ruffell took no part in the determination of this application, nor the discussion and vote thereon.

Councillor Read declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in respect of item 13 (Manor House, High Street, Meonstoke – case number: SDNP/20/05327/TCA) as he was an acquaintance of the applicant in his capacity as fellow city councillor. However, Councillor Read stated that he had taken no part in any discussions regarding the application and therefore took part in the consideration of this item and voted thereon.

To give consideration to the approval of alternative arrangements for appointments to bodies set up by the Committee or the making or terminating of such appointments.

There was no action to report under this item.

Minutes of the additional meeting held on 2 December 2020.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the additional meeting held on 2 December 2020 be approved and adopted

The committee agreed to receive the Update Sheet as an addendum to Report PDC1176.

A copy of each planning application decision is available to view on the council’s website under the respective planning application.

The committee considered the following items:

Item 7: (Amended plans) Demolition of existing four dwelling houses and the erection of nineteen dwellings, with associated access, parking and landscaping

1-4 Woodpeckers Drive, Winchester

Case number: 20/01554/FUL

During public participation, Elizabeth and Roger King and Russell Blackman spoke in objection to the application and Chris Rees (applicant) spoke in support of the application and all answered Members’ questions thereon.

During public participation, Councillor Weir spoke on this item as Ward Member.

In summary, Councillor Weir made reference to the three other contiguous development sites in this area by the same developer: Meadowlands, The Close and 6 Woodpeckers Drive, as well as the proposed application. She stated that policy DM14 had not been applied on these sites and that the lack of affordable housing contribution, as specified in policy CP3, was wholly unacceptable. In addition, Councillor Weir made reference to the s106 agreement, the covenant for the previous developments, market uplifts and the affordable housing viability assessment for the proposed application which needed to be questioned.

In conclusion, Councillor Weir urged the committee to refuse the application as she considered it did not accord with policy CP3.

In response to Members’ questions, the Service Lead: Estates provided clarification regarding the viability assessment report, existing use values and expectations in respect of land values.

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.

Item 8: Rear two storey extension to property

Holly Tree Cottage, Park Road Winchester. 

Case number: 20/01901/HOU

During public participation, Sean McPike spoke in objection to the application and Tom Oldroyd (applicant) spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

During public participation, Councillor Hiscock spoke on this item as Ward Member.

In summary, Councillor Hiscock stated that he was speaking on behalf of a number of local residents who had misgivings about how the proposed application would impact on their lives with particular reference to how the application had come forward and concerns regarding their loss of privacy.

Councillor Hiscock also referred to the strong concerns expressed in relation to the proposed balcony which he stated would be built in an area where balconies were not common place. This was seen as a first floor platform which he considered would result in overlooking into the gardens of neighbouring properties. In addition, reference was made to the potential for light spillage from the first floor balcony at night. 

In conclusion, Councillor Hiscock sought clarification surrounding the proposal for a garden room which was not shown within the plans and the cumulative effect of all the developments on site.

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 5 to read that, no external lighting be installed to the first floor balcony area without submitting details to the Local Planning Authority for approval regarding the type of lighting, illuminent etc. Development to be undertaken in accordance with these approved details.

Item 9:  2 No. dwellings, garages, landscaping and access. Demolition of existing dwelling.

The Garden House, Southdown Road, Shawford 

Case number: 20/01589/FUL

During public participation, Gary Bradford (agent) spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

During public participation, Councillor Bell spoke on this item as Ward Member.

In summary, Councillor Bell stated that she was speaking on behalf of the local Residents’ Association who had a number of general concerns in respect of the conditions set out in the report and suggested that the Compton and Shawford Village Design Statement (VDS) be given greater consideration. She made reference to residents’ concerns in respect of drainage, with inadequate road surface water drainage, landscaping and the construction management plan. For example, construction vehicles parked on the surrounding grass verges whereby most failed to rectify the damage caused to the verges upon the completion of works.

In conclusion, Councillor Bell asked that in order to control further drainage issues, conditions should state that there ‘must’ be permeable hard standing and soakaways due to existing problems and that a surface water and infiltration assessment should be carried out prior to further consideration of the application. 

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. 

Item 11: First floor rear extension

16 Cold Harbour Close, Wickham 

Case number: 20/02156/HOU

The Service Lead - Built Environment referred Members to the Update Sheet which set out that one further letter of support had been received.

During public participation, John Farrow and Andrew Hudson spoke in objection to the application and Mr C Duffy (applicant) spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

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 12: Proposed detached replacement dwelling (Amended plans received 9/11/20)

28 Churchfields, Twyford

Case number: SDNP/20/01416/FUL

The Service Lead - Built Environment referred Members to the Update Sheet which set out the background of an earlier, dismissed appeal on the same site, including an extract of the appeal decision and a full copy of the appeal decision; clarification from the South Downs National Park Authority in respect of the settlement boundary; and one further letter of representation raising no new points.

During public participation, Rob Powter (applicant) spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

During public participation, Councillor Cook spoke on this item as a Ward Member.

In summary, Councillor Cook stated that Twyford (including the South Downs National Park (SDNP)) was without a settlement boundary until the neighbourhood plan was adopted. Councillor Cook stated that the proposal was within a built up area of the village and considered that, although the roof height had been lowered and some of the bulk reduced, it was still contrary to policy due to its size and appearance. In addition, she considered that it did not reflect positively with the character and street scene of the area and would result in an unacceptable impact to residents of Churchfields and The Crescent.  She believed it would set a precedent by allowing development with no garden amenity space and suggested that existing parking issues would be further exacerbated due to the number of bedrooms proposed.

In conclusion, Councillor Cook believed this to be an overbearing, excessive and cramped form of development and urged the committee to refuse the application.

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 13: Tree works taken directly from the tree survey schedule, as detailed in the report.

Manor House, High Street, Meonstoke

Case number: SDNP/20/05327/TCA

During public participation, Mrs Lumby (applicant) was present to answer questions to support the application but did not wish to address the committee to raise any additional points.

At the conclusion of debate, the committee agreed to raise no objection to the application for the reasons set out in the Report.

RESOLVED:

That the decisions taken on the Planning Applications in relation to those applications outside and inside 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 (Holly Tree Cottage, Park Road, Winchester: Case number:  20/01901/HOU) permission be granted for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report, subject to an additional condition 5 to read that no external lighting be installed to the first floor balcony area without submitting details to the Local Planning Authority for approval regarding the type of lighting, illuminent etc. Development to be undertaken in accordance with these approved details. 

The virtual meeting commenced at 9:30am, adjourned between 1:00pm and 2:00pm and concluded at 3:45pm.

Chair