Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting - Via Skype for Business. View directions

Contact: Mark Gregory  Democratic Services Officer

Link: follow_the_meeting

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

To receive and record apologies for absence.

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

 

2.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest relating to items on the agenda.

 

3.

Minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party

Minutes:

The Committee received the minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party held on 3 September 2020.

 

4.

APP/18/01033 - Land East of, Castle Avenue, Havant pdf icon PDF 800 KB

Proposal:           Residential development comprising 69 No. dwellings with access from St George’s Avenue together with access, car parking, landscaping, electrical substation and associated works.

 

Additional Information

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The site was the subject of a site briefing by the Site Viewing Working Party.

 

Proposal:       Residential development comprising 69 No. dwellings with access from St George’s Avenue together with access, car parking, landscaping, electrical substation and associated works.

 

The Committee considered the written report and recommendation from the Head of Planning to grant permission.

 

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

 

1)               included an additional comment received from the owner of 27 St Georges Road;

 

2)               included a copy of the presentation given to the Site Viewing Working Party held on 3 September 2020;

 

3)               included the minutes of the Site Viewing Working Party held on 3 September 2020;

 

4)               updated the officers report with amended plans and a revised recommendation to reflect these plans; and

 

5)               gave responses to the additional information requested at the Site Briefing which included:

 

a.               clarification of the distance from the centre of the site to the bus stop at Green Pond Corner;

 

b.               clarification of the timetables for buses serving the bus stops in Southleigh Road and Green Pond Corner;

 

c.               clarification on the definition of sustainability in relation to bus services;

 

d.               a slide indicating the separation distances from 27 St Georges Avenue to plot 69;

 

e.               clarification on the potential for adopting the proposed link road into the remainder of site H15 as a highway maintainable at the public expense;

 

f.                clarification on the nutrient neutrality aspect of this application.

 

All members confirmed that they had read the above supplementary papers prior to the meeting.

 

The members received a presentation from the officers outlining the report and answering the questions raised by the Site Viewing Working Party and individual members of the Committee since the agenda was published. The officers brought the Committee’s attention to the fact that at Full Council on 9 September 2020 the Council had approved the changes to the pre-submission Local Plan and these changes could now be given limited weight. The officers also drew the members’ attention to the amended plans received which had rectified the external garage sizes to meet the correct parking space size.

 

With regards to the 5 deputations and 1 comment received, the officers commented that:

 

i.                   the proposal included electric vehicle charging points for the majority of dwellings;

 

ii.                   given that the Local Plan had not yet been submitted to the Secretary of State for approval, and given the level of unresolved objections to the policies, only limited weight could be afforded to the emerging policies;

 

iii.                   70% of the dwellings complied with the technical space standards;

 

iv.                   Policy H15 which identified the site as a site for development had no unresolved objections and so could be given more weight in the planning balance;

 

v.                   a contribution would be given by the developer towards the work in the community;

 

vi.                   the area to the south of the development was not available to the developer to use as an access point to the site, and so  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.