Agenda and minutes

To receive and record apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

To approve the minutes of the Development Management Committee held on  

The Minutes of the meeting of the Development Management Committee held on 14 January 2016 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

There were no matters arising

To receive the minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party held on

The Minutes of the meeting of the Site Viewing Working Party held on 23 February 2016 were received.

To receive and record declarations of interests from members present in respect of the various matters on the agenda for this meeting.

There were no declarations of interests.

The Chairman to report the outcome of meetings attended or other information arising since the last meeting of the Committee.

The Chairman had nothing to report.

The Committee are invited to consider any matters they wish to recommend for site viewing or deferment.

There were no matters to be considered for site viewing and deferment.

To receive requests to make a deputation to Committee.

(1)          Mr Millett (Applicant’s agent) – Application APP/15/01397 - High Street, Emsworth (Minute 93b)

(2)          Councillor Cresswell (ward councillor) – Application APP/15/01397 - High Street, Emsworth (Minute 93b)

(3)          Mr Comlay (objector) – Application APP/14/01225 – Market Parade Development Site, Market Parade, Havant (Minute 93a)

(4)             Ms Ann Buckley (objector) - APP/14/01225 – Market Parade Development Site, Market Parade, Havant (Minute 93a)

(5)             Mr Pattenden (objector) - APP/14/01225 – Market Parade Development Site, Market Parade, Havant (Minute 93a)

(6)             Ms Cutts (applicant’s agent) and Mr Adams (developer) – APP/14/01225 – Market Parade Development Site, Market Parade, Havant (Minute 93a)

Proposal: Change of use from vacant class A2 unit to mixed class A1/A3 coffee shop.

Additional Documents:

http://tinyurl.com/zx9yg8y

Proposal:             Change of use from vacant class A2 unit to mixed class A1/A3 coffee shop.

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation of the Executive Head of Planning and Built Environment to grant permission.

The Committee was addressed by the following deputees:

(1)               Mr Millett, who, on behalf of the applicants supported the proposal for the following reasons:

(a)  The retail element of the high street would remain strong

(b)  The change of use is in line with Planning Policy

(c)  The property had remained empty for over a year and a change of use would allow for new retail opportunities which would add to the vitality and vibrancy of the area.

(d)  The signage for the proposed retailer would be sympathetic to the street scene.

(2)               Councillor Creswell who supported the application for the following reasons:

(e)  The proposed change of use would be beneficial to the community and surrounding area.

(f)   The new retailer would add to the vibrancy of the area and fill an otherwise empty unit.

(g)  The retail element of the high street had suffered over the last 2 years and would need to grow to aid the regeneration of the area.

In response to a question raised by a member of the Committee, the officers advised that issues of market competitions and details of the retailer for the unit were not a matter for consideration.

The Committee discussed this application together with the views raised by the deputees. The Committee considered that the proposal would not be out of character with the street scene. The Committee also considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on neighbouring businesses. It was therefore

RESOLVED that Application APP/14/01182 be granted permission subject to the conditions set out in the officer’s report.

Proposal: Outline application with all matters reserved for demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to erect 130No. apartments and 1126sqm of ground floor commercial/retail space (Use Classes A1-A5 and B1(a)) and associated service, access and 58 private residential basement parking spaces (indicative height of building between five and thirteen stories).

Additional Documents:

http://tinyurl.com/zo74fwh

Proposal:             Outline application with all matters reserved for demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to erect up to 130No. apartments and 1126m² of ground floor commercial/retail space (Use Classes A1-A5 and B1(a)) and associated service access and 58 private residential basement parking spaces (indicative height of building between five and thirteen stories).

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation of the Executive Head of Planning and Built Environment to grant permission.

The Committee received supplementary information, circulated prior to the meeting which included:

(a)       Details of an update proposal

(b)       Details of additional representations received since the agenda was published

(c)       Details of updated recommendations

(d)       Information requested by the Site Viewing Working Party which detailed the Hampshire County Council Response to Traffic Consultations and the impact the Development would have on traffic management.

The Committee was advised by officers that the proposed designs were indicative and not a final approved design of the development.

The Committee was addressed by the following deputees:

(1)             Mr Comlay who objected to the proposal for the following reasons:

(a)        There was a significant amount of opposition from members of the local community.

(b)        The indicative plans by reason of height and bulk were not sympathetic to the character of the area.

(c)        The Car Parking provisions were not sufficient to accommodate the large number of vehicles that would likely come with a high number of inhabitants.

(d)        The proposed development would be in breach of the Local Development Order for Market Parade and would make further regeneration of the area difficult. Awaiting the completion of the LDO would be more beneficial to Market Parade.

(2)          Ms Buckley who objected to the proposal for the following reasons:

(e)          The proposal is out of character, bulky and  overdevelopment of the site

(f)           The proposal does not make any provisions for affordable housing.

(g)          The proposal does not detail how the dwellings will be managed and maintained.

(h)         The site plan will impact the conservation area to the east of the site.

(3)          Mr Pattenden who objected to the proposal for the following reasons:

(i)           The high number of inhabitants in a densely populated tower block would be detrimental to the quality of life of the residents.

(j)            The high number of dwellings and additional retail units would overburden the highways and car parking facilities

(k)          The work of the Local Development Order would provide a better basis for regeneration of the Town Centre. The proposal was premature.

(4)          Ms Cutts who spoke in support of the proposal for the following reasons:

(l)        Regeneration of the Market Parade Development site had proved problematic in the past; the proposal was sustainable development.

(m)      Similar proposals had proved beneficial and successful in similar areas.

(n)       The type of development targets a specific demographic whose needs are otherwise not met by the housing provisions in the local area.

(o)       The proposal would add vibrancy and vitality to the area and work to the benefit of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93b