Agenda and minutes

Any information received after the agenda has been published, relevant to the applications on the agenda to be considered by the Committee will be published here.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Todd and Councillor C Burton.

Councillor C Day attended as substitute.

There were no declarations from Members of the Committee to make representation as Ward Councillor on any item within the agenda.

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2010 were approved as a true and accurate record.

This was an application for outline planning permission for two dwellings with all detailed matters reserved for subsequent approval.

The site measured 0.188 of a hectare.  The site was situated on the western edge of Wansford and was within the village boundary as identified on the proposals map (inset 26) of the Peterborough Local Plan (First Replacement).  The site was located adjacent to 19 Old Leicester Road and part of it was in use as a storage depot for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).

The site sloped gently to the south and was covered with grass and small native shrubs.  The northern boundary had extensive hedge growth with several mature trees which were identified in the Local Plan as a protected treed or hedge frontage (although none were protected by Tree Preservation Orders).  The east and west boundaries contained mature hedges and the southern boundary had several mature trees and hedge growth.

The existing property to the east was a large detached L shaped property with a detached garage.  The next house along, No. 19A, appeared to have been built in the former total site area of No. 19.  There was 2.5 metres separating these two properties.  To the north and across the Old Leicester Road were large detached properties, part of Robin’s Field.  The western edge of the site was in line with the western edge of the residential property in Robin’s Field which formed the western most extent of the village envelope.

The site lay within Wansford SSSI and although it was accepted by the relevant bodies that the site was most likely included in the designation in error, the effects of the development upon the SSSI were still to be taken into account. All of the adjacent land to the west was protected under this designation. The site lay just outside the Conservation Area to the East.

The Planning Officer addressed the Committee and gave an overview of the main issues. Members were advised that the proposal was for an outline application with all matters reserved, therefore the exact position and shape of the buildings as highlighted on the indicative drawings provided were subject to change. It was anticipated that the current site access would remain broadly the same, but the application did not include the detailed design of the junction. Planning permission had already been received for the gas tanks that currently occupied the site to be relocated on the site.

Members were further advised that comments from the Planning department had been relayed to the applicant stating that if the proposal was granted then a higher standard of design than the one shown on the indicative drawing was expected.

Members’ attention was drawn to additional information contained within the update report.  A letter had been received from Wansford Parish Council highlighting their concerns and a series of photographs had also been submitted showing the driveway of the land adjacent to 19 Old Leicester Road and the road leading up to the entrance of Wansford Village  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Planning permission was sought for the construction of a two storey dwelling adjacent to the existing dwelling at 13 St Paul’s Road.  The proposal represented infill development within the area and would result in an appearance of semi detached residential properties. 

Off road parking for 2 vehicles was proposed (one for the proposed property and one for the existing dwelling) and would be accessed from Gilpin Street. The dwelling was proposed to have two bedrooms and would mirror the built form and appearance of the existing dwelling at 13 St Paul’s Road.

The application site was formed by the side garden of the single detached two storey Victorian villa at 13 St. Paul’s Road.  Access to the existing house was from St Paul’s Road and off road parking was provided via a single detached garage (to be demolished under the proposal) and the associated stand-off area. The site occupied a prominent corner plot on the junction of St Paul’s Road and Gilpin Street. The surrounding area was predominantly residential and had a uniform character of terraced and semi detached Victorian properties, albeit some infill development had taken place. 

The Planning Officer addressed the Committee and gave an overview of the proposal. Members were advised that there had previously been two planning applications to extend and convert number 13 St Pauls Road into four flats, one application had been refused and one had been withdrawn. This had led to the current proposal. The current proposal would result in the loss of a driveway and garage which served number 13, however alternative provisions would be made for car parking at the rear of the application site, this being comprised of two car parking spaces, one for the existing dwelling and one for the proposed application.

The proposed application would match design and layout of the existing dwelling and would not result in any loss of outlook, privacy or daylight to number 13 or neighbouring properties.

After debate and questions to the Planning Officer and the Highways Officer, a motion was put forward and seconded to approve the application. The motion was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: (unanimously) that the application be approved subject to:

·        The prior satisfactory completion of an obligation under the provisions of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for a financial contribution to meet the infrastructure needs of the area

·        The conditions numbered C1 to C9 as detailed in the committee report

·        All works being carried out in accordance with the approved details for the reason as detailed in the committee report

·        The additional note regarding the window dimensions as detailed in the committee report

·        If the S106 has not been completed within 2 months of the date of this resolution without good cause, the Head of Planning Services be authorised to refuse planning permission for the reason R1 as detailed in the committee report.

Reasons for the decision:

Subject to the imposition of the Conditions, the proposal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The application sought planning permission for the construction of a new all weather floodlit sports pitch, relocated children’s play area and associated car parking.  The application scheme was similar to that which Members resolved to grant planning permission for as part of the outline application 07/01946/OUT.  The outline application originally sought permission for residential development, an all weather floodlit sports pitch and associated car parking. However, due to changes in priority, Peterborough City Council was now seeking to construct the sports pitch, children’s play area and car parking prior to the erection of the residential dwellings.

The proposed all weather pitch would be enclosed by 4.5m high steel mesh fencing and built to the specification of the Football Association for a ‘3^rd generation’ pitch.  The lighting columns will stand at 14 metres in height and consist of three floodlighting lumieres angled at the horizontal.  Access to the pitch itself would be gained directly from the existing changing rooms on the site. 

The children’s play area was proposed to be relocated from its existing position to the north east of the site and would provide more modern play equipment as well as a central seating area.  The existing foot and cycle path which ran north south through the application site would be realigned and given a sinuous shape to connect the proposed new play facilities to the proposed residential development to the north east. 

The proposal also sought permission for a new 117 space car park which would formalise the parking arrangements for the site.  It was proposed that a new access would be created to the north east of the site which would allow vehicular access through the proposed residential development and ultimately off the Atherstone Avenue roundabout.  The current access from Mayors Walk was proposed to be retained on a temporary basis pending the approval and construction of the residential development. 

The proposal had been deferred from the previous meeting of the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee pending further noise assessments on the site in order to clarify the potential noise impact on local residents. Details of noise mitigation used on other all weather pitches in the area had also been requested.

The Planning Officer addressed the Committee and advised that an executive summary of the requested noise report that had been undertaken had been circulated to Members of the Committee. The report had stated that if there was a noise reading undertaken with no sport taking place and then a noise reading undertaken with sport taking place, there would only be a difference of 3.2db, this was a negligible difference that would barely be audible to local residents. The Planning Office further advised the Committee that there were no other all weather pitches in the area with acoustic mitigation in place.

The Committee was advised that if it felt it necessary, a two metre high acoustic fence had been proposed by the applicant and could be implemented, however concern had been expressed by the Planning Officer regarding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The application sought permission for the construction of 16 x 2 bed and 6 x 3 bed two storey houses with amenity areas provided in the form of terraces above car ports; and 18 x 2 bed flats in 2 three storey blocks with parking and open space.  Access to the development was off South View Road.  This was a revised application to a previous planning consent ref. 08/01613/FUL which sought alterations to elevations and roof design.

The application site was approximately 0.66ha and was a vacant brownfield site comprising a collection of garden land and garage blocks and in part was formerly occupied by commercial/industrial property.  The garages were mostly redundant.  The site was enclosed to the south, west, east and north east by residential properties, predominantly two storey terraced and to the north west by the Paul Pry Public House and Premier Inn (hotel).

The Planning Officer addressed the Committee and gave an overview of the proposal and the main issues. Members were advised that the proposed scheme was different in numerous ways to the original application that had been approved in June 2009. The main differences were small changes to the road layout, small changes to the external appearance of the dwellings such as the removal of windows at first floor level to overcome overlooking concerns, increases in the roof heights of the dwellings, re-design of the façade of the dwellings in order to achieve a more contemporary look, a small re-siting of one of the blocks and changes in the windows at first floor level. These windows had originally been proposed to be full length floor to ceiling windows and the current proposal was for the bottom half of the windows to be obscure glazed in order to address overlooking issues.

Members were further advised that the recent layout change reflected the requirements of the Highway Authority to enable the roads to be adopted. These changes related to the widths of the roads through the site.

Members’ attention was drawn to additional information contained within the update report. An email had been received from Councillor Sandford, Ward Councillor for the proposal, stating that opinions among local residents on the development site had been divided. The development would bring much needed social housing to the area, the dwellings looked to be of a high standard and the rear access road would also be welcomed by some residents, however, there were concerns regarding overlooking, the volume of traffic likely to be entering and exiting onto South View Road, the loss of garden land to the development and the issue of open space on the development site not being adequate to meet policy standards.

Mr Asif Shaheed, an objector and local resident, addressed the Committee and responded to questions from Members. In summary the concerns highlighted to the Committee included:

·        The lack of consultation with existing residents of the area

·        The problems with the new development overlooking existing properties

·        The problems with congestion on South View  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

A report was presented to the Committee which sought its approval for a number of suggested changes to the Council’s Constitution relating to the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee (PEP) speaking scheme, delegations to officers and the Planning Code of Conduct.

Members were advised that it was good practice to periodically review and if appropriate revise the governance arrangements for the PEP Committee.

The existing speaking scheme had been in place for a number of years and had been identified for update. The main reasons for updating the scheme were to enable more efficient administration and to simplify existing provision. There had been issues highlighted in the recent months with regard to the amount of time allocated for specific groups of speakers and also the deadline for the cut off for registering to speak. The amended speaking scheme also identified a simplified order of speaking and encompassed a new provision for the submission of written information which had not previously been included.

In order to clarify the issues which should be dealt with at the PEP Committee, further amendments had been made to the officer delegations and to the terms of reference. These amendments encompassed all changes required to ensure the PEP Committee’s time was being utilised accordingly and to ensured consistency across the Constitution. The Planning Code of Conduct had also been reviewed and a number of minor changes had been identified in relation to referrals and delegations to officers.

Members were advised that there was a slight change to one of the suggestions highlighted and this was to remove the words ‘Parish Councils’ from Part 5, Section 4 – Planning Code of Conduct, 3.1.1. This paragraph dealt with referrals to Committee and it was felt that to automatically refer all applications from Parish Councils to the Planning and Environmental Protection Committee was unnecessary.

The Planning Officer further advised the Committee of an additional recommended change, as follows:

After brief discussion, Members highlighted concerns regarding the speaking times being weighted in favour of Parish Councils. Members were advised that further consultation was being undertaken on this point. 

RESOLVED:

1.      to approve the changes as detailed in the committee report

2.      to approve the additional change as highlighted by the Planning Officer

3.      to recommend that Full Council approve the amendments as detailed in the committee report

4.      to recommend that Full Council approve the additional amendment as detailed by the Planning Officer