Minutes:
The Committee considered an application to demolish an
existing church and erect 18 affordable flats with external amenity space and
parking spaces.
The Senior Planning Officer made reference to a letter of
objection that had been received from a neighbouring property stating the
proposed building would block their TV reception. However, this was a private matter and if the
proposal went ahead was quite doubtful
Following the circulation of the update sheet prior to the
meeting comments on the proposal had been received from Cllr Clare Sutton, one
of the Local Members. She felt whilst it
was important to protect the character of the area the ability to provide
affordable housing was paramount and she was content with the application.
The Senior Planning Officer gave members a presentation on
the proposal highlighting the building in situ at the present time along with
the bungalow which was situated at the rear of the church. Members were also
shown the height of the proposed building which was below the height of the
neighbouring Victorian villas. He
advised there would be 16 car spaces underground with a further 2 spaces at the
front of the property in readiness for the 18 units. Each unit would be 2 bedrooms, 67 square
metres in area.
The Senior Planning Officer had met with the bungalow owner
and some amendments had been made to the proposal following that visit. Pop out
windows with obscure glazing were highlighted in order to protect the secluded
part of the garden of the bungalow.
The main planning issues were highlighted to members, these
included:-
·
Principle
·
Residential development within defined
development boundary
·
100% affordable housing,
·
Contribution towards 5 year housing land supply
·
Effect on conservation area
·
Effect on residential amenity and;
·
Highway safety.
A number of written
representations objecting to the proposal were read out by the Technical
Officer and are attached to these minutes.
The Senior Planning Officer made reference to comments made
regarding over development of the site and noted that the amenity space would
be over 200 square metres for community use.
There had been a number of comments about the units starting
off as affordable homes and then being secured as second homes. There would be legal constraints in place to
ensure these units could only be used for affordable housing.
With regards to some lack of communication with certain
properties, the Senior Planning Officer noted this was possibly as those
properties were not adjacent to the red line of the application site. Properties higher up the slope had made
comments about possible overshadowing and overlooking but these properties were
about 46 metres away so it was felt there was no issue with this.
In respect of ‘the decision already had been made’ comment,
the Senior Planning Officer explained that the case officers made the
recommendations and elected members made the decisions.
The Senior Planning Officer felt that the issue about
drainage had been addressed. A report
had been issued to the Flood Risk Manager who was content and had recommended
appropriate conditions which had been included.
The Highways Officer made reference to comments made about
the increase of vehicles and appreciated that the current building had been
underused in recent years but in the past it would have been quite a busy
area. He would expect there to be a
lower number of vehicles with the proposed flats. Accessibility via the highway was good and
there was no recorded accident history within 110 metres of the property. However, the intention was to make it even
safer.
In respect of the quantity of car parking, the Officer
advised there were no minimum standards only guidance. However, the proposed
building was on a bus route and was near a cycle route.
Cllr Brian Heatley spoke in support of the proposal, which
is also attached to the minutes.
Cllr Ireland noted that there were not many opportunities in
Weymouth for affordable housing but asked for confirmation if the units would
be for rent or sale. The Senior Planning
office confirmed the units would be for rent and that the Housing Enabling
Officer was content with the application.
Cllr Ireland highlighted the access to the Rodwell Trail for cycling and
was happy to propose the recommendation.
Cllr Wheller made reference to comments that the proposal
was not in keeping for the area but felt that it did reflect other architecture
in the area. She felt the developers had
been very imaginative and considerate with the proposed building. She was very pleased to see the building was
100% affordable housing. She made
reference to a pedestrian crossing on Wyke Road where problems with a new
building were now being mitigated but felt it would be better to sort any
potential issues beforehand.
Cllr Dunseith was generally in favour of the development but
had concerns about the car parking and questioned where other cars would go as
nearby streets were quite busy. She felt
the entry to the flats off the road might be a bit small. The Highways Officer
advised the width of the access would be 4.5 metres and that the current
standard width was 5 metres. The Senior Planning Officer advised that an
amended plan could be sought to increase the driveway entrance width to 5
metres.
There was a concern regarding the amenity space, with 18x2
bedroom flats there would be a number of children and it would be important for
residents to have somewhere outside to go.
Cllr Cocking felt that the housing was desperately needed
for the area and was happy to second the proposal, as long as condition
included to state it was not for holiday home use.
Following a question whether the sub-station referenced in
the presentation would be removed or incorporated, the Senior Planning Officer
advised that his understanding from the applicant was there was no problem for
it to be removed.
Proposed by Cllr Nick
Ireland, seconded by Cllr Susan
Cocking
Decision:
(A): That authority be delegated to grant to the Head of Planning, subject to completion of a S106 agreement to secure provision of 100% affordable housing, and
subject to the receipt of a satisfactorily amended plan in respect of the width
of the vehicular access (to be increased to 5m), and the planning conditions
outlined in the appendix to these minutes.
(B) Refuse permission for the reasons
set out below if the legal agreement under Section
106 of the town and country Planning
Act 1990 (as amended) is not completed within 6 months of the date of the committee resolution or such extended time as
is agreed by the Head of Planning.
1.Policy HOUS1 of the adopted West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan 2015 requires a minimum on-site provision of units as affordable housing and in the absence of a planning obligation to secure these affordable units the scheme would fail to meet the substantial unmet need for affordable housing in the district and the proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy HOUS1 of the adopted West Dorset Weymouth and Portland Local Plan. Furthermore the community-related benefits inherent in the scheme would not be achieved. Hence the scheme would be contrary to the objectives of paragraph 92 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).