Agenda item

Planning Application No. 18/1610/FUL - St Andrews Yard, Willeys Avenue, Exeter

To consider the report of the Service Lead City Development.

 

Minutes:

The Assistant Service Lead City Development presented the application for the demolition of existing single storey business premises and construction of a new nine dwelling residential apartment block

 

The Assistant Service Lead City Development referred to points of objections received from Councillor D. Moore, as set out in the update sheet, in which Councillor Moore commented on and supported the objections reported. He advised that an additional condition could be added to secure details of bin storage and that an existing proposed condition would ensure the proposal met Council policy in respect of its carbon neutral targets.

 

Matt Briggs spoke against the application. He raised the following points:-

 

·         representing residents in Willeys Avenue having lived here for 15 years;

·         not objecting to this site being developed and fully appreciate need to build a certain number of new homes.  Willeys Avenue is a historical Victorian street with an industrial heritage. Residents agree the site will benefit from development but the proposal is imposing and out of place on a Victorian terraced street;

·         scale and massing of the design is inappropriate with a huge impact on neighbours;

·         there is a stark difference with everything else in Willeys Avenue. It is an ugly building, the flat roof is unattractive and invasive and does not blend in with the existing street scene;

·         plans show three stories with the roof line above neighbouring terrace houses resulting in loss of privacy, overlooking, loss of light, increased noise, impact on wildlife and parking/traffic problems;

·         the design is of low quality and the buff brick finish is inappropriate;

·         the developer included pictures of the street from the end of Willeys Avenue that joins Alphington Road. The example of how this proposed building will fit in is apparently because of the Brewers Court development. These flats were built to match/reflect the existing old factory building and blend in well. The design of Brewers Court is sympathetic to the appearance of the existing buildings. This new build has apexe roofs which is very typical of the area, the windows and brickwork were made to look very similar and these properties do not have balconies;

·         a build of this size will impact on the quality of light for at least eight homes within the immediate vicinity of the St. Andrews Yard; and

·         object to the proposed plans on the basis of its size being overbearing, not in-keeping with the surrounding houses and the scale of the building will stop much of daylight on homes;

 

Graham Chilvers spoke in support of the application. He raised the following points:-

 

·         for the last 15 years St Andrew’s Yard has been used for the sale of low cost second hand cars;

·         Alphington is designated a high flood risk zone and any new building is required to have its ground level over 3.5 ft above the street level. This is therefore an apartment block including a wheelchair friendly lift;

·         it would be considerably lower than the industrial building on the other side of the street and all the other three story developments in the street;

·         its actual size and mass is not dissimilar to a row of terrace houses;

·         an elevated train goes by every 10 minutes giving all the passengers a view of all the rear gardens and bedroom windows;

·         this new building will not impact on privacy in Willeys Avenue;

·         Willeys Avenue is a mixture of a large redeveloped industrial building, rows of terrace housing and approximately five, three storey apartment developments, with Willeys Court being a much larger, three story development. The development lines up with the existing row of terrace houses and the first section has brick built bay windows to match the existing terrace. The next section has small Juliet balconies for light and style. The balconies are at the rear of the building as they are south facing;

·         the proposal is not an unprecedented break from the existing eclectic street scene and brings a hint of modern design. It offers nine apartments with easy access and secure parking that will be a joy to live in; and

·         the development will lift the area by replacing a junk yard with nine quality residences.  

 

Noting that the applicant was prepared to alter the materials in respect of the end of the three blocks by changing the proposed buff coloured brick, Members were of the view that, even though there were some larger buildings in the street, the design and scale of this application was not in keeping with the surrounding residential area.

 

The recommendation was for approval, subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

 

The recommendation for approval was moved, seconded put to the vote and lost.

 

Scaling, massing and inappropriate design as reasons for refusal were moved and seconded.

 

RESOLVED that the application for the demolition of existing single storey business premises and construction of a new nine dwelling residential apartment block be REFUSED as the proposal would be contrary to Paragraph 127 (a, b, c, and d) and Paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), objective 9 and Policy CP17 of the Exeter Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2012), Policies DG1 (b, g, and h) of the Exeter Local Plan First Review (2005) and the Residential Design Guide SPD (2010) because:-

 

1)         by virtue of its scale and massing this apartment block would be dominant and visually intrusive within the streetscene, unsympathetic with and detrimental to the character of this established residential area; and

 

2)         the proposed development represents poor design that would fail to take the opportunities to improve the character or quality of the area, would not contribute positively to the visual richness and amenity of the townscape and would not raise the quality of urban living through excellence in design.

 

Supporting documents: