Agenda and minutes

No apologies were received for this meeting

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 White declared a pre-determination in respect of item 6 (Land South of Crabwood, Sarum Road, Sparsholt, Hampshire - case number: 23/01025/FUL) stating that she had made a public comment during the first consultation period in May 2023 in support of the application in her capacity as WinACC supporter and member of the Green Party. Councillor White stated that she would take no part in the determination of the application and left the meeting for the consideration of the item taking no part in the discussion or vote thereon.

Councillor Laming declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in respect of item 6 (Land South of Crabwood, Sarum Road, Sparsholt, Hampshire - case number: 23/01025/FUL) due to his role as Ward Member. However, he had taken no part on discussions regarding the application, therefore he took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon

In addition, Councillor Laming declared a personal and prejudicial interest in respect of item 9 (70 Olivers Battery Road North, Olivers Battery, Winchester – case number: 24/01559/HOU) as the applicant was a fellow ward member and close colleague. Councillor Laming stated that he would take no part in the determination of the application and left the meeting for the consideration of the item taking no part in the discussion or vote thereon.

Councillor Cunningham declared a personal (but not prejudicial) interest in respect of Item 12 (2 Abbotts Ann Road, Winchester – case number: 24/01568/HOU) due to his role as member of Littleton and Harestock Parish Council.  However, he had taken no part in discussions regarding the application, therefore he took part in the consideration of the item and voted thereon.

Minutes of the previous meeting held on 14 August 2024.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 14 August 2024 be approved and adopted.

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

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:

Proposal Description: Item 6: Installation of a solar farm and associated development (AMENDMENTS RECEIVED October 2023): Additional Information including, changes to application red line; revised plans; photomontages; additional assessments and supporting information (Revised Description & Revised Details) (FURTHER DETAILS RECEIVED July 2024)

It was noted that the majority of the committee had visited the application site on 24 September 2024 to enable members to observe the site in context and to gain a better appreciation of the proposals

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the Update Sheet which set out in full the following matters:

(i)             Three emails circulated to members since the publication the report, the contents of which did not alter the officer’s recommendation.

(ii)            Further correspondence received from an objector, together with the associated planning officer response, the contents which did not alter the officer’s recommendation.

At the conclusion of the officers presentation, the case officer drew the committee’s attention to item 3 in the update sheet which set out several minor amendments proposed following discussion between the officers and the applicant, setting out in full the revisions to Condition 4 (temporary permission and decommissioning), Condition 5 (cessation before fortieth anniversary), Condition 20 (colour of structures) and Condition 21 (details of capacity and equipment).

Furthermore, the case officer provided a verbal update at the meeting proposing a further additional condition to protect archaeological assets in situ within the site.

During public participation, Samantha Culhane (also reading a statement on behalf of Rachel Waldron) and Councillor Sue Wood (Sparsholt Parish Council) spoke in objection to the application and Councillor Eleanor Bell (Hursley Parish Council), Chris Field and Nicola Jones spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

Councillor Horrill spoke as contiguous Ward Member in objection to the application. In summary, Councillor Horrill raised the following points:

·       Keen that solar was one of the options in the drive for the council to achieve its green energy plans, but considered that the location of this solar farm was inappropriate. Despite many options being brought forward, no progress had been made on the alternative sites.

·       The proposed site was used extensively during Covid for walking cycling and horse-riding with The Clarendon Way linking the two cities running alongside and Crabwood, both adjacent to the site.

·       The proposal did not fully comply with the policies of the development plan currently in place regarding the setting and the landscape, as indicated by MTRA4, DM23 and CP20 and its impact on heritage assets.

·       Considered that the commercial aspects of the application had outweighed some of the serious policies the council had worked hard to develop and had agreed which had been ignored in this instance.

·       Asked the committee to carefully consider the message it was giving not only for the current plan, but also for future plans.

·       Questioned the faith residents would have in the administration and the consultation process for Regulation 19 if policies were easily overturned in the current plan.

·       Queried why a solar farm would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Proposal Description: Item 7: Erection of detached dwelling.  

The application was deferred for consideration at a future meeting of the committee. 

Proposal Description: Item 8: Redevelopment of redundant watercress beds and adjacent land for the creation of wetland and other habitat as an environmental mitigation bank including nitrate and phosphate credits, and BNG units, for allocation to relevant future Estate and off-site 3rd party development; landscaping and associated works.  (AMENDED DESCRIPTION AND PLANS). 

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the Update Sheet which set out in full a number of conditions to be removed and revisions to conditions and details of an updated walkover to assess the ecological conditions on site provided in the conclusion of the Technical Note.

During public participation, Richard Osborn spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

Councillor Power spoke as Ward Member. In summary, Councillor Power raised the following points:

·       Concern regarding the impact on white-clawed crayfish in the Candover Brook at risk with this development.

·       Seeking reassurance on the biosecurity measures and how this would be enforced to protect the habitats of white-clawed crayfish.

The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

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. 

Proposal Description: Item 9: Rear single storey extension to family home, new raised hard landscaping.

The application was introduced. The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report. 

The following items will not be considered before 2.00pm:

(Depending on the Committee’s progress, some of the morning’s items may overrun into the afternoon session.  Nevertheless, the following items will not be considered before 2.00pm).

Proposal Description: Item 11: Approval of Reserved Matters of Outline Application (17/1528/OUT) including Appearance, Landscaping, Layout, Scale of Employment Park and associated works (AMENDED PLANS RECEIVED 07.03.2024).

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the Update Sheet which set out in full details of an additional objection received and an email received from Councillor Power dated 23 September 20204 in relation to the removal of trees outside of the red line plan. An additional presentation slide was included to show the approved landscaping along Sun Lane under the application that was approved by the committee on 16 February 2022.

During public participation, David Jobbins spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

Councillor Power spoke as Ward Member. In summary, Councillor Power raised the following points:

·       The site was no longer bound by mature trees and hedging to break up the mass of buildings as these were removed by Taylor Wimpey in response to Hampshire County Council changing the Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) design.

·       In reference to the new planting plan, it was noted that trees take many years to mature and provide effective screening. The impact of this would not just affect local residents but those that travel down Sun Lane to the A31 access and asked if the committee could take any measures to mitigate this until screening matured.

The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

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.

Proposal Description: Item 12: Garage conversion with new replacement roof and single storey front porch extension to incorporate photovoltaic panels in roof slope. Replacement windows. Erection of canopy to side of dwelling

The application was introduced. The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report.

Proposal Description: Item 13: (Amended Plans received) Demolition of former RAOB Club and redevelopment to provide a mixed-use scheme comprising 6no. flats (3 x 1 bedroom and 3 x 2 bedroom) with a west facing communal roof terrace and a 75 sqm commercial/retail unit at ground floor with associated works

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the Update Sheet which outlined an amendment to the wording of the ‘Impact on character and appearance of the area’ section within the report.

During public participation, Alice Drew and Ross Galtress spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

In response to questions, the council’s Senior Planning and Litigation Lawyer clarified the definition of a non-designated heritage asset.  

The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

The committee agreed to refuse permission for the reasons and informatives set out in the Report.

Proposal Description: Item 14: New dwelling and vehicle access on land adjacent to 44 Stockers Avenue

The application was introduced. During public participation, Fiona Harwood (also on behalf of Alison Henry and Chris Henry) spoke in objection to the application and Claire White and Jeremy Tyrrell spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

Councillor Morris spoke as Ward Member. In summary, Councillor Morris raised the following points:

·       Driveway and access road required the hedge border with 46 Stockers Avenue to be removed so the planting would not be sufficient height or density to provide adequate screening to 46 Stockers Avenue. Suggested that plans be resubmitted to retain the hedge border.

·       Residents have expressed concern that the driveway and access road is too narrow for fire engines to gain access and there had been no fire safety and risk assessment made of the development.

·       The proposed development requires excavation to the hedge at the west of the property which forms a boundary with 41 Hampton Lane and backs onto a SINC and nature corridor. Suggested either less extensive excavation or several metres of ground between excavation and the hedge to ensure its continued survival.

·       As noted by the City of Winchester Trust, the proposal was oversized for the site. The site will not provide the water retention and drainage of genuine garden land.

·       Biodiversity Impact. Considered that all conditions for both this and the householder application be applied to both applications and include the entirety of section 5 of the updated ecology report dated 9 September 2024 to ensure all recommendations within the report are included.

·       If the committee were minded to approve the application, Councillor Morris requested that consideration be given to an additional condition to request that no Saturday working be permitted to reduce the impact to neighbouring properties.

The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report.

Proposal Description: Item 15: Single storey rear extension and two storey side and front extension with associated internal works. External landscaping works with garden office

The application was introduced. During public participation, Fiona Harwood (also on behalf of Alison Henry and Chris Henry) spoke in objection to the application and Claire White and Jeremy Tyrrell spoke in support of the application and answered Members’ questions thereon.

Councillor Morris spoke as Ward Member. In summary, Councillor Morris raised the following points:

·       Balcony still results in overlooking to properties at 42 and 46 Stockers Avenue.

·       The urban design assessment of the previous application identified overlooking issues within the bounds of this application. Suggested the application be deferred until an urban design assessment had taken place.

·       Landscaping indicated for the front of the house within the urban design assessment would not be in keeping with the character of the area.

·       Following the illustration provided by the objector, the design drawing submitted on 7 March 2024 indicated that the office building would have a second storey and therefore this should be formally disregarded from the report.

The Committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

          RESOLVED:

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the Report.

The Corporate Head of Planning and Regulatory Services provided the committee with a detailed summary of the 6 planning appeal decisions for the period 1 April 2024 to 30 June 2024 and the 18 enforcement appeal decisions for the period 1 April 2024 to 30 June 2024. 

The committee thanked the Planning Team for the positive appeal outcomes achieved.

          RESOLVED:

That the summary of planning and enforcement appeal decisions received during the period 1 April 2024 to 30 June 2024, be noted.

The meeting commenced at 9.30 am, adjourned between 11.50 pm and 2 pm and concluded at 4.10 pm.

Chairperson