Agenda and minutes

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 31 July 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on 31 July 2023 were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chair as correct.

Councillors are reminded of the need to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests that relate to business on the agenda and which have not already been included in the register of interests, before any discussion takes place on the item. Unless the interest is sensitive, you must also disclose the nature of the interest. In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, you must then leave the room and must not participate in any further discussion of the item. Councillors requiring clarification should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer prior to the day of the meeting.

Councillor M. Mitchell declared an interest in Min. No. 64 and did not participate in the debate or vote on this matter. He spoke on this matter from the floor as a member of the public.

To consider the report of the Director City Development.

Councillor M. Mitchell declared an interest and did not participate in the debate or vote on this matter. He spoke on this matter from the floor as a member of the public.

The Principal Project Manager (Development Management) (CC) presented the application for outline permission for block of flats following the demolition of the garage workshop (all matters reserved).

Members were provided with a description of the site location through a site plan, site photos, an aerial view, an indicative site plan, indicative elevations and parameter plans, the report also setting out the following key elements:-

·         the principle of development;

·         description changes, site history and outline consent;

·         heritage, design and amenity;

·         highway considerations

·         contamination and ecology;

·         sustainability;

·         waste audit; and

·         financial considerations. 

The Principal Project Manager (Development Management) (CC) provided further detail of the application:-

·         the current lawful use was as a MOT station and garage, although it had ceased operations;

·         there had been a recent refusal at Planning Committee for redevelopment for Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA), which had been refused solely on the grounds of community imbalance and an appeal had been submitted against it;

·         the outline application was for a maximum of nine market flats with all matters reserved;

·         due to the previous refusal reason being community imbalance because of student occupation and the current application being for market housing, it was not considered that any approval of this scheme would weaken the Council's position in reference to the appeal;

·         there had been 19 objections and four mixed comments on the proposal, with the majority of these relating to the use of the property by students, parking issues and community imbalance;

·         the principle of redevelopment of this site was acceptable for the following reasons:-

·   the site was not allocated for development and was considered to be a windfall site. The delivery of flats on this previously developed land would therefore meet Policies H1 and H2 of the Local Plan and CP1 of the Core Strategy;

·   the St. James Neighbourhood Forum Policy SD3 supported proposals on windfall sites providing affordable homes for local people and good quality private residential development;

·  the application was below the 10 dwelling threshold for affordable housing, but would provide private residential development supporting this policy. Details relating to the final design of it would be at reserved matters stage and would need to be of good quality to meet the policy requirements;

·   the existing site is mentioned in the Longbrook Conservation Area Appraisal as not making a positive contribution;

·   the indicative plans were subject to change. Due to the nature of surrounding built form, two parameter plans were agreed which set out the maximum height and positioning of the new building to ensure that the reserved matters which would have suitable restrictions in place;

·  the Highway Authority had no objection to the proposal. The site was within a sustainable location and within a Controlled Parking Zone that would allow car-free development to occur at this site. Any future dwellings on the site would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To consider the report of the Director City Development.

The Principal Project Manager (Development Management) (CC) presented the application for the variation of Condition 2 (approved drawings) of approval 12/1426/FUL (Alterations and roof level redevelopment to provide 13 flats with associated access and communal facilities) to alter the height and internal layouts.

Members were provided with a description of the location of the site through a site plan, an aerial view, photos of different views including from nearby residential properties, existing and approved elevations, floor plans and 3D visuals, the report also setting out the following key elements:-

·         the principle of development;

·         details of each floor;

·         historic setting and visual impacts; and

·         highway considerations.

The Principal Project Manager (Development Management) (CC) provided further detail of the application:-

·         the application was for a variation of conditions of a 2012 approval at 130 Fore Street, St Davids. The 2012 approval was for an upwards extension and conversion of the West Street fronting aspects to residential with the current proposal seeking to vary the approved plans and amend the upper floors through the additional storey and alterations to the basement level (fronting West Street) to provide three commercial units. It was proposed to retain the same number of 13 flats;

·         as it was a variation to an existing approval, the assessment was limited to the amendments proposed and their material impacts, rather than the entire scheme;

·         there had been 139 objections to the proposal, primarily focussed on the changes to the basement retail unit, currently Crankhouse Coffee, and the impact of the increase in height on properties opposite in terms of daylight and privacy and the impacts on the wider street scene;

·         basement levels fronting West Street - this was currently in commercial use but to be removed entirely and three flats created with three commercial units instead at the lower floor levels which would support the wider Fore Street shopping area. There was a dwelling at this level and this would remain as previously approved. There were also bin store alterations, with the creation of a new commercial bin store adjacent to one of the units;

·         the ground floor, lower-first floor, upper-first floor and the commercial unit fronting Fore Street were remaining as previously approved;

·         there would be three flats on the ground floor, three flats on the lower-first floor and two flats on the upper-first floor and a communal garden;

·         the second floor upward extension had been approved as one flat with a private roof terrace which it was proposed to extend to allow two flats on this floor with no separate roof garden;

·         the third floor upward extension was a new addition to create a one, two bed dwelling with a private balcony and roof terrace;

·         all of the revised flats met the Nationally Described Space Standards;

·         the Council's Urban Designer considered that, whilst there would be a level of impact from the proposal, the majority of impacts, such as any overlooking or dominance for properties opposite would be from the previously approved upward extensions and conversions;

·         in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

To consider the report of the Director City Development.

The report of the Director City Development was submitted.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

To consider the report of the Director City Development.

The schedule of appeal decisions and appeals lodged was submitted.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.