Agenda item

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee which sought approval for the construction of a four-storey building, including basement, to provide 19 flats (16 x 1 bed and 3 x 2 bed, all meeting national space standards) and basement parking. The site was subject to a number of previous applications, the most recent of which was approved under N/2019/0426 for 14 flats and basement parking. The latest proposal was similar in design to that which was most recently approved with regards to height. The scheme had been amended during the course of the application to remove a corner of the development which was found to be encroaching onto the highway. Highways had objected to the application due to a lack of parking, however it was noted that the development site was in a sustainable location, close to shopping facilities and public transport links. A central void would be provided to the west to allow windows to be provided within it. Windows would be positioned within this void so that habitable rooms faced non-habitable or secondary windows which could be obscure glazed. A condition requiring this was proposed. The site sat within the Boot and Shoe Quarter Conservation Area and the Conservation Officer advised that the development would be an improvement to that previously granted which can still be implemented on site. An independent viability assessment concluded that the development would not be viable if any affordable housing was proposed and reduced S106 financial contributions were accepted. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained additional supporting comments from the Planning Agent and an amendment to the recommendation.

Councillor Stone, in her capacity as a Ward Member for Castle, spoke against the application and agreed that the site needed developing, however the scheme represented an overdevelopment; there were no amenities provided and the area already suffered with issues linked to the high concentration of HMOs. Councillor Stone felt that it was wrong to provide high density accommodation with no outdoor communal space and that the site was not in a sustainable location, and raised concern with the lack of affordable housing.

In response to questions, the Committee heard that a condition was proposed to secure details of security for the entire development prior to occupation. It was noted that the Conservation Officer and TCCAAC did not agree with rendering to the external face of the building; Condition 15 required details of all proposed external facing materials to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Council and the developer had been advised that render would not be appropriate.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE subject to completion of an Section106 Agreement to secure the planning obligations set out in the report, and  subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and that the Assistant Director for place & Economy be granted delegated authority to amend the conditions as deemed necessary.

Councillor King joined the meeting at this juncture and advised of no declarations of interest.