Issue - meetings

Fourth floor roof extension to 83-85 East Street to provide three new residential apartments (comprising 1 x 1-bed unit; 1 x 2-bed unit; 1 x 3-bed unit) together with works to stair and lift cores and other associated works.

The Committee received a presentation on the application from the Principal Planning Officer.

Description:

Fourth floor roof extension to 83-85 East Street to provide three new residential apartments (comprising 1 x 1-bed unit; 1 x 2-bed unit; 1 x 3-bed unit) together with works to stair and lift cores and other associated works.

Officer Recommendation:

Approval, subject to conditions, informatives, and s106 legal agreement.

Public Speaking:

The Agent spoke in support of the application.

Decision:

Following consideration, Councillor Clive Woodbridge proposed that condition 11 be amended to prevent any construction works from taking place on Saturdays, in order to further safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties and to prevent any nuisance from being caused to said occupiers as a result of construction works taking place on what is traditionally a non-working day.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Neil Dallen.

The Committee voted (5 For, 2 Against, 1 Abstaining, and the Acting Chair not voting) in favour of the proposal.

Following further consideration, Councillor Neil Dallen proposed that the application be refused for the following reasons:

Reason: The proposed development would represent an overdevelopment that would fail to respect the pattern of development in the locality and would appear as an overly dominating and incongruous addition that would fail to respect the surrounding built form and the proposal would therefore fail to integrate with the prevailing character an appearance of the area, contrary to Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, CS5 of the Core Strategy, and policies DM9, and 10 of the Development Management Plan.

Reason: The proposal would cause less than substantial harm to the setting of the conservation area for which the public benefits do not outweigh the harm and is contrary to section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy and policies DM 8, 9, and 10 of the Development Management Plan.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Peter O’Donovan.

The Committee voted (3 For, 4 Against, 1 Abstaining, and the Acting Chair not voting) against the proposal, and the motion was lost.

The Acting Chair subsequently put the Officer recommendation, as amended with the agreed change to Condition 11, to the vote. The Committee voted (3 For, 5 Against, and the Acting Chair not voting) against the recommendation, and the motion was lost.

Following further consideration, Councillor Peter O’Donovan proposed that the Officer recommendation to approve the application, as amended with the agreed change to Condition 11, be revisited, explaining that, since the previous vote, he had listened to debate and to the guidance of Officers and was now minded to vote differently.

The proposal was seconded by Councillor Kate Chinn.

The Committee voted (4 in favour, 4 against, and the Acting Chair exercising his right to a casting vote to vote in favour) in favour of the proposal.

Subsequently, the Committee resolved (4 in favour, 4 against, and the Acting Chair exercising his right to a casting vote to vote in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33