Erection of 10 no. one-bedroom flats.

Erection of 10 no. one-bedroom flats.

 

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided as follows:

§               Amended plans had been received which lowered the height of all three accommodation blocks and removed part of the first floor unit to the rear of 50 East Street.  The design of the fenestration on the two storey unit had also been modified.

§               The Conservation Officer had reviewed the building to be demolished and had confirmed that it may be listed by virtue of attachment to surrounding buildings.

 

Officer comments were also provided as follows:

§               The amendments addressed the Conservation Officer's concerns and assisted in reducing overall height and visual mass when viewed from East Street, ensured that the development was now subservient to the adjacent Methodist Hall and also reduced the impact on the immediate neighbour at 50 East Street.  The plans were considered acceptable.

§               The Conservation Officer considered that the demolition of the single storey building would enhance the setting of the adjoining listed buildings and he therefore maintained no objection subject to the appropriate application being submitted.

§               As the amended plans were considered acceptable, the recommendation detailed in the report was adjusted accordingly.

 

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr. Cook and Mr. Holden spoke in objection to the application and Mr. Guilor spoke in support of the application.

 

Councillor MAF Hubbard, the Local Ward Member, drew attention to an objector’s comment that the adjacent Methodist Hall should not set the precedent for the scale of development on this site.  Councillor Hubbard considered that the scale and mass of the building would be out of keeping with the area and would have a significant impact on Pulling Mews.  He also expressed concerns about the number of units proposed and the degree of overlooking and overshadowing.

 

Councillor NL Vaughan commented on the narrowness of East Street and, given the listed buildings nearby, questioned the contemporary design approach.

 

Councillor DB Wilcox said that all city centre developments should include provision for the storage of electric mobility vehicles for persons with disabilities.  He also asked how this application differed to a previous application that was refused [CE2007/2166/O refers].  

 

In response to questions and comments, the Principal Planning Officer advised that:

§               there was adequate space to include a store for mobility vehicles;

§               a two storey scheme would still involve a degree of overlooking;

§               re-positioning the development further back on the site would have more impact on 50 East Street; and

§               the previous application would have involved a greater degree of impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties.

 

Councillor Wilcox noted that the Conservation Manager - Historic Buildings and the Conservation Advisory Panel had expressed reservations about the design and questioned whether this proposal had fully addressed the reasons for refusal in respect of the previous application.

 

Councillor WU Attfield commented that the scale and mass of the proposal would have an impact on the streetscape.  She also noted that the narrowness of East Street caused problems for pedestrian safety, particularly as vehicular speeds could be quite high.

 

Councillor PJ Edwards suggested that authority to issue planning permission be delegated to officers, in consultation with the Local Ward Member and the Chairman, to resolve the final details.  He also noted the Traffic Manager’s comment about a possible link from the site to Barroll Street and felt that this should be investigated.

 

The Principal Planning Officer advised that the Section 106 Agreement would prevent the future occupiers of the development from being eligible for residents’ parking permits within the city centre.  He clarified the distance between the site and Pulling Mews and noted that the building-to-building relationship was not untypical.  He also confirmed that the Conservation Manager was satisfied with the amended plans.

 

Councillor AM Toon drew attention to the draft Heads of Terms, noted the need to use contributions to improve infrastructure in the locality, and made the following comments:

·               the sum in respect of public open space should be allocated towards the Castle Green;

·               the sum in respect of sports should be allocated towards access improvements at the Hereford Canoe Centre;

·               the lack of a pavement contrasted with efforts to provide Safe Routes for Schools; and

·               the contribution towards off site highway works should include an element towards the refurbishment of St. Peter’s Square bus shelters/street furniture.

 

Councillor RI Matthews noted that Hereford City Council had no objections to the application and that officers did not consider that the impact on amenity would be such that refusal of planning permission was warranted in this instance.

 

Councillor MD Lloyd-Hayes expressed concerns about the density and design of the proposal and the impact on the local neighbourhood.  Comments were also made about library facilities and bus services.

 

Councillor DJ Benjamin noted that contemporary designs had integrated well in other parts of East Street, despite the initial reservations of the Sub-Committee.

 

Councillor Hubbard requested that, should the application be approved, the contribution towards off site highway works be put towards a Traffic Order to include East Street in the 20mph speed limit scheme.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.      A02 Time limit for submission of reserved matters (outline permission).

 

2.      A03 Time limit for commencement (outline permission).

 

3.      A04 Approval of reserved matters.

 

4.      A05 Plans and particulars of reserved matters.

 

5.      B07 Section 106 Agreement.

 

6.      C01 Samples of external materials.

 

7.      D02 Approval of details.

 

8.      E01 Site investigation - archaeology.

 

9.      E04 Submission of foundation design.

 

10.    F10 No balconies/roof amenity area.

 

11.    F17 Obscure glazing to windows.

 

12.    G11 Landscaping scheme - implementation.

 

13.    H27 Parking for site operatives.

 

14.    H29 Secure covered cycle parking provision.

 

15.    I16 Restriction of hours during construction.

 

16.   I51 Details of slab levels.

 

17.   I56 Sustainable homes condition.

 

Informatives:

 

1.      N15 Reason(s) for the Grant of PP/LBC/CAC.

 

2.      N19 Avoidance of doubt - Approved Plans.