Conversion of the existing warehouse building into 8 no. residential apartments

The proposal was for the conversion of the existing warehouse building into 8 residential apartments. The application was referred to the Committee by Cllr. Fleming on the grounds of over development, overlooking, affordable housing provision and highways.

Members’ attention was brought to further information contained within the late observations sheet, but did not propose any amendments or changes to the recommendation before the Committee.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       William Terry

For the Application:              Paul McPartland

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Hogarth

Local Member:                      Cllrs. Fleming and Mrs. Dawson

Members asked questions of clarification from the Speakers and Officers. The Leader was asked how the Council could provide permits to allow potential residents to use St. John’s car park. He responded that Officers thought it unlikely residents would actually use the car park and it was the responsibility of the developers to provide parking spaces, if needed.

In response to questions the Case Officer confirmed that she had measured the distance from the rear of the building to the rear of number 18 Golding Road as 36m. The density from the development would be 266 units per hectare and although the policy aimed for 40 units per hectare, there was no maximum density stated in the policy and the built form already existed.

It was moved by the Chairman and was duly seconded that the recommendation in the report to grant permission subject to conditions be adopted.

Members discussed the lack of parking provision. Members suggested it was unlikely the residents would be carless and that parking in nearby roads was already difficult, with little public transportation particularly in the evening. The Planning Manager drew Members’ attention to the recent decision of a planning inspector regarding the New Inn site, nearby, and that objections on parking grounds had been overturned.

Some Members raised concerns about the amenity of potential residents as the height level of obscure glazing was still uncertain and could leave residents with limited outlook.

Concern was also raised about the number of flats within the development and that this would constitute overdevelopment of the site.

The motion was put to the vote and it was lost.

It was moved by Cllr. Firth and duly seconded that planning permission be refused on grounds that the proposal represented an overly dense development of the application site which would result in unacceptable living conditions for future occupiers of the dwellings by reason of lack of outlook, contrary to policy SP7 of the Core Strategy,  EN1 of the Local Plan and EN2 of the ADMP

The motion was put to the vote and it was

Resolved: That planning permission be refused on the grounds that the proposal represents an overly dense development of the application site which would result in unacceptable living conditions for future occupiers of the dwellings by reason of lack of outlook, contrary to policy SP7 of the Core Strategy,  EN1 of the Local Plan and EN2 of the ADMP.

(Cllr. Miss. Stack left her place in the chamber for the consideration of the item)