Venue: Concorde Room, Council Offices, Farnborough
Contact: Lauren Harvey 01252 398827 Email: lauren.harvey@rushmoor.gov.uk
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST All Members who believe they have a disclosable pecuniary interest in
any matter to be considered at the meeting may not participate in any discussion or vote taken
on the matter and if the interest is not registered, it must be disclosed to
the meeting. In addition, Members are required to leave the meeting while the
matter is discussed. Minutes: Having regard to the Members’
Code of Conduct, the following declarations of interests were
made. Those Members with a disclosable pecuniary interest left the
meeting during the debate on the relevant agenda items:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 19th August, 2015 (copy attached). Additional documents: Minutes: The Minutes of the Meeting held on 19th August, 2015 were approved and signed by the Chairman. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT, 1990 (AS AMENDED) - TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) ORDER, 1995 - DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS GENERALLY To consider
the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1544 on planning applications recently
submitted to the Council (copy attached with a copy of the index appended to
the agenda). Minutes: RESOLVED: That (i)
planning
permission/consent be refused in respect of the following application and as
set out in Appendix “A” attached hereto for the reasons mentioned therein: *
15/00475/FULPP (The Queen’s Head, No. 97 North Lane, Aldershot); (ii)
the applications dealt with by the Head of Planning,
where necessary in consultation with the Chairman, in accordance with the
Council’s Scheme of Delegation, more particularly specified in Section “D” of
the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1544, be noted; (iii)
the following
application be determined by the Head of Planning, in consultation with the
Chairman: 15/00562/FULPP (The Old Mint, Pound Road, Aldershot);
and (iv) the current position with regard to the following
application be noted pending consideration at a future meeting: 15/00606/FULPP (Nos. 31 – 33 Queen’s Road – No. 62
Peabody Road, Farnborough). * The Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1544 in respect of this application was amended at the meeting. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
REPRESENTATIONS BY THE PUBLIC To
consider the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1546 (copy attached) which reports on cases of planning enforcement and
possible unauthorised development. Minutes: In accordance with the
guidelines for public participation at meetings, the following representations were made to the Committee and were duly considered before a
decision was reached:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
APPLICATION NO. 15/00462/FULPP - THE OLD MINT, POUND ROAD, ALDERSHOT To
consider the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1547 (copy attached) on a request to vary the terms of a S.52 Planning
Agreement. Minutes: The Committee considered the
Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1544 regarding the retention of two
three-bedroom flats with associated works at The Old Mint, Pound Road,
Aldershot. It was noted that the
recommendation was to grant planning permission, subject to the completion of a
satisfactory agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act,
1990. RESOLVED: That (i)
subject to the completion of a satisfactory
agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 by 12th
October, 2015 to secure an appropriate contribution towards Special Protection
Area mitigation and open space, the Head of Planning in consultation with the
Chairman, be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions
and informatives set out in the Head of Planning’s
Report No. PLN1544; however (ii) in the event that a satisfactory Section 106 agreement is not received by 12th October, 2015, the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Chairman, be authorised to refuse planning permission on the grounds that the proposal fails to make provision for open space contrary to the provisions of Policy CP12 of the Rushmoor Core Strategy and ‘saved’ Policy OR4 of the Rushmoor Local Plan Review 1996 – 2011; fails to provide mitigation for the impact of the development on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area in accordance with the Council’s Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy contrary to Policy CP13 of the Rushmoor Core Strategy; and does not provide appropriate car and cycle parking in accordance with the Council’s adopted car and cycle parking standards or make satisfactory provision for refuse storage as required by Saved Local Plan Policy ENV17 and Core Strategy Policies CP2 and CP17. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
ENFORCEMENT AND POSSIBLE UNAUTHORISED DEVELOPMENT To
consider the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1548 (copy attached) which seeks authority to enter
into a S.106 Planning Agreement. Minutes: (1) No. 177 Ash Road, Aldershot – The Committee received the Head
of Planning’s Report No. PLN1546 regarding the unauthorised change of use of
commercial space into residential accommodation at No. 177 Ash Road, Aldershot.
It was reported that No. 177
Ash Road was a long-established hot food takeaway (Star Kebabs) located in the
middle of the ground floor of the building. To the east side of this was a
sub-divided area of the building with lawful planning use as a separate hot food
takeaway shop on the ground floor and with storage space above. No. 177a Ash
Road was located to the west side of Star Kebabs and was also understood to be
in the same ownership and was currently in use as a hairdressers. There was
also a self-contained residential one-bedroom flat located on the first floor
of the building, No. 177c. It was highlighted that there was limited on-site
parking due to its position alongside the traffic-light junction of Ash Road,
Lower Newport Road and Lower Farnham Road. Following complaints, an
inspection had revealed that parts of the eastern takeaway premises were being
occupied residentially, in the form of a pair of studio units on the ground
floor and with a further flat in the ancillary storage space on the first
floor. The owner had submitted a planning application in June, 2015 which had
been declared invalid due to material inaccuracies in the plans. Although the
applicant’s agent had advised that work was afoot to prepare corrected plans,
this work had not, to date, been completed and no corrected plans had been
submitted to the Council. The Committee was informed that
the conversion of these premises would be considered acceptable in principle.
However, such conversions would only be granted planning permission, subject to
conditions to secure and retain various provisions in the interests of the
amenities of the area, the amenities of neighbours, highway safety etc. In this
case this would involve the provision, allocation and retention of parking
spaces, and provision and retention of bin storage. This had not been possible
in the configuration of this site and the unauthorised development in question
because there had been no means to impose the requisite conditions to render
the proposals acceptable in planning terms. In addition, none of the usual
Section 106 financial contributions had been secured, most notably the
contribution for special protection area mitigation and avoidance. This was
considered fundamentally unacceptable and in conflict with the Habitats
Regulations, Government Planning Policy and Guidance and adopted Development
Plan Policy. It was also considered that there would have been a requirement
for a public open space contribution in this case. These matters were therefore
considered to be grounds for serving an Enforcement Notice. RESOLVED: That an Enforcement Notice be served requiring the
cessation of the unauthorised material change of use of the land for
residential use with a period of six months for compliance for the following reasons:
(i) the unauthorised development intensifies the use of the ... view the full minutes text for item 40. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
MOUNTBATTEN COURT, BIRCHETT ROAD, ALDERSHOT - SECTION 52 LEGAL AGREEMENT To
receive the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1549 (copy attached) on the progress of recent planning appeals. Minutes: The Committee considered the
Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1547 (as amended at the meeting) which sought
approval to relax a clause in a legal agreement which restricted the age of the
occupiers of flats in Mountbatten Court, Birchett
Road, Aldershot. The Committee was informed that
the owners of Flat No. 5 Mountbatten Court had written to the Council
requesting a relaxation of the clause because the age restriction had been
causing problems with the sale of the flat. Planning permission had been
granted for the erection of a three-storey block of seventeen two-bedroom flats
and nine one-bedroom flats in August, 1987. At the time, parking standards had
been considerably higher and based on minimum standards. The developer had
provided less than the full requirement on the basis that the flats would be
for the elderly. A clause in the legal agreement had therefore been drawn up
under Section 52 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971 which required that
the sixteen flats on the ground and first floors should be occupied by at least
one person of pensionable age. Following consultation with the
residents of Mountbatten Court, one letter had been received from the executors
of the late owner of Flat No. 13 who had indicated that they had no objections in
respect of the request from the owners of Flat No. 5 and, in addition, making
their own request for non-enforcement in respect of Flat No. 13. Another letter
had subsequently been received from the managing agents for the Mountbatten
Court Management Company, who confirmed that they were in support of the
Council not enforcing the terms of the Legal Agreement in terms of the age
restriction of occupiers. It was also noted that none of
the age-restricted flats at Mountbatten Court had been designed to current
mobility standards and the age restriction had only been imposed because the
developer had been unable to provide enough parking on the site for the
development. Since planning permission had been granted, the Council’s parking
requirements had changed significantly in response to changes in Government
planning guidance. The parking standards applicable to residential development
did not now make any distinction in terms of parking requirements between
general purpose flats and those restricted to residents of pensionable age. The
only reductions in parking requirements available for residential development
now related to sheltered housing establishments providing care to much less
mobile residents. Furthermore, current Government guidance and the Council’s
adopted parking requirements allowed for significant reductions in parking
provision in town centre locations. On considering the above, the Committee agreed that retention of the age restriction would no longer serve a planning purpose. In addition, the approach had previously been agreed for other flats in the development, the most recent being Flat No. 10 in November, 2013. Similar age-restricted flats in Phoenix Court had also been subject to requests for relaxations and had been allowed by the Council. In the circumstances, it was therefore felt that the Council should not seek to ... view the full minutes text for item 41. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
HAM AND BLACKBIRD, NO. 281 FARNBOROUGH ROAD, FARNBOROUGH Minutes: The Committee received the Head
of Planning’s Report No. PLN1548 which requested authority for the Council to
complete a Section 106 legal agreement in relation to the Ham and Blackbird
site at No. 281 Farnborough Road, Farnborough. The Committee was reminded
that permission had been refused by the Development Management Committee in
January, 2015 for the demolition and redevelopment of the Ham and Blackbird
site at No. 281 Farnborough Road. Permission had been refused for reasons relating
to the impact of traffic movement on highway safety and the local network,
failure to secure Section 106 contributions (towards special area protection
mitigation and public open space) and failure to provide appropriate provision
of affordable housing (as set out in full in the Head of Planning’s Report). The applicants had subsequently
lodged an appeal which was due to be heard on 9th December, 2015 and the
Committee was advised that, in preparation for the appeal, the applicants and
the Council would need to prepare a ‘Statement of Common Ground’ to identify to
the Inspector those issues on which there was no dispute. The applicants had
indicated that they intended to submit a draft Section 106 agreement to the
Inspector at the hearing in order to address the reasons for refusal that
related to failure to secure Section 106 contributions. In respect of the failure of
the proposal to provide affordable housing, the applicants had agreed to make
provision to meet the Council’s requirement in full (22 units (35%) of the
total number of units). In this respect the applicants were proposing that
eleven affordable units would be provided in the scheme and, at the request of
the Head of Environmental Health and Housing, a financial contribution would be
secured equivalent to the cost to the developer of providing the remaining
eleven units within the scheme. This would provide affordable housing off-site
that would be more appropriate to meeting local housing needs. Although subject
to discussion relating to the value of the contribution, should agreement be
reached on this matter, this financial contribution would also need to be
secured by the Section 106 agreement. The applicants had approached
the Solicitor to the Council to request that work be undertaken with the
Council to produce a draft Section 106 Agreement seeking to address the Reasons
for Refusal Nos. 2, 3 and 4. Authority was therefore being sought from the
Development Management Committee for the Head of Planning, in consultation with
the Solicitor to the Council to prepare the necessary draft Section 106
Agreement to address these matters. The Committee was assured that
this work would not affect the Council’s position in relation to Reason for
Refusal No. 1 as set out in the Head of Planning’s Report, but would remove the
need for the Council to defend Reason for Refusal Nos. 2, 3 and 4 at the
forthcoming appeal hearing. RESOLVED: That the Head of Planning, in consultation with the Solicitor to the Council, be authorised to complete a legal agreement to address ... view the full minutes text for item 42. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
APPEALS PROGRESS REPORT Minutes: The Committee received the
Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1549 concerning the following new appeal:
RESOLVED: That the Head of Planning’s Report No. PLN1549 be noted. |