dc-070613-r04-lsm

Report to Planning Development Control Committee

Date: 13 June 2007 Report of: Director of Regulatory Services Subject: PLANNING APPLICATIONS

SUMMARY

This report recommends action on various planning applications.

RECOMMENDATION

The recommendations are detailed individually at the end of the report on each planning application.

Item 7(i)

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-2-

Index List of Applications with Page Numbers

Application No. Item

FAREHAM EAST P/07/0575/FP 2 KINGS ROAD - ASSEMBLY HALL -

FAREHAM

ERECTION OF HOUSE OF MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY WITH 9 BEDROOMS, COMMUNAL FACILITIES,OFFICE, CYCLE AND BIN STORAGE

Permission 6

FAREHAM NORTH P/07/0395/VC STATION APPROACH - MOBILE CATERING

VAN -, FAREHAM, ADJACENT TO PRAGUE JUNCTION

VARIATION OF CONDITION 4 OF P/06/1396/VC (TO ALLOW MOBILE CATERING VAN TO REMAIN OPEN NOW PRAGUE JUNCTION HAS CLOSED

Permission 7

P/07/0630/FP 4 CHAUCER CLOSE, FAREHAM DEMOLITION OF SINGLE GARAGE AND

ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND TWO STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION

Permission 8

FAREHAM NORTH-WEST P/07/0455/CU HENRY CORT DRIVE - NORTH WEST

COMMUNITY CENTRE - FAREHAM

CHANGE OF USE OF PUBLIC OPEN SPACE TO CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA & ERECTION OF FENCING

Permission 9

P/07/0556/AD OAK MEADOW EARLY YEARS CENTRE,

TEWKESBURY AVENUE, FAREHAM

PROVISION OF LIGHTING TO NEW SIGNAGE NEAR SITE BOUNDARY

Consent For 5 Years

10

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-3-

FAREHAM SOUTH P/07/0522/FP 66 ST MICHAELS GROVE, FAREHAM,

HAMPSHIRE

PROVISION OF NEW REAR DORMER AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION

Permission 11

P/07/0553/FP 42 REDLANDS LANE, FAREHAM ERECTION OF FIRST FLOOR REAR

EXTENSION Permission 12

P/07/0554/FP 29 COOMBE FARM AVENUE, FAREHAM PROVISION OF REPLACEMENT ROOF

INCORPORATING FRONT DORMER AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION

Permission 13

P/07/0593/FP 41 FAIRFIELD AVENUE, FAREHAM ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR

EXTENSION TO CREATE GROUND FLOOR FLAT

Permission 14

P/07/0608/FP 78 REDLANDS LANE, FAREHAM CONVERSION OF CONSERVATORY TO

FORM REAR EXTENSION WITH PITCHED ROOF

Permission 15

P/07/0627/FP PALMERSTON DRIVE -, FAREHAM TOWN

FOOTBALL CLUB -, FAREHAM

UPGRADE COMMUNITY SPORTS FACILITIES, PROVIDE NEW ALL WEATHER PITCHES AND ERECTION OF DRIVING TEST CENTRE

Permission 16

FAREHAM WEST P/07/0541/FP 134 BLACKBROOK ROAD, FAREHAM DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS

AND ERECTION OF NEW SINGLE STOREY SCOUT AND COMMUNITY BUILDING

Permission 17

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-4-

P/07/0645/TO 4A DALEWOOD ROAD, FAREHAM CROWN LIFT TO 3 METRES, CROWN

CLEAN, REDUCE LATERAL SPREAD BY 1-2 METRES OAK TREE COVERED BY FTPO 565

Consent 18

HILL HEAD P/07/0532/FP SWORDFISH CLOSE - FLATS 6 & 7 -, LEE

ON SOLENT

PROVISION OF JULIETTE BALCONIES AND FRENCH DOORS TO BEDROOMS ONLY

Permission 19

P/07/0635/FP 22 CROFTON LANE, HILL HEAD DEMOLITION OF EXISTING DWELLING

AND ERECTION OF REPLACEMENT DWELLING AND DOUBLE GARAGE

Permission 20

P/07/0643/FP 79 SHANNON ROAD, STUBBINGTON RETENTION OF FRONT/SIDE BOUNDARY

FENCE IN EXCESS OF 1 METRE ADJACENT TO HIGHWAY

Refuse 21

LOCKS HEATH P/07/0521/FP 25 THE GLADES, LOCKS HEATH ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE/REAR

EXTENSION AND FRONT CANOPY Permission 1

PARK GATE P/07/0471/CU 266 BROOK LANE, SARISBURY GREEN CHANGE OF USE TO MIXED RESIDENTIAL

& BUSINESS USE (TO ALLOW CHILDMINDING FOR 12 CHILDREN UNDER 8 YEARS OLD)

Permission 2

PORTCHESTER EAST P/07/0515/FP 10 CARLTON ROAD, PORTCHESTER CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DORMER

WINDOWS, ROOF ALTERATIONS AND DETACHED GARAGE

Permission 22

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-5-

P/07/0526/FP 20 SISSINGHURST ROAD, PORTCHESTER ERECTION OF FIRST FLOOR SIDE

EXTENSION Permission 23

P/07/0538/FP WHITE HART LANE 52-54/ 3 NEVILLE

AVENUE, PORTCHESTER

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUNGALOWS & ERECTION OF 7 TOWN HOUSES & 2 BUNGALOWS, BIN/CYCLE STORAGE & PARKING

Permission 24

P/07/0638/AD CASTLE STREET - PORTCHESTER

PARISH HALL -, PORTCHESTER

DISPLAY OF INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED BOX SIGN

Consent For 5 Years

25

PORTCHESTER WEST P/07/0528/FP 4 CAMS HILL, FAREHAM ERECTION OF SINGLE/TWO STOREY

REAR EXTENSION Permission 26

P/07/0616/FP CAMS HILL SCHOOL, SHEARWATER

AVENUE, FAREHAM

ERECTION OF EXTENSION TO PROVIDE NEW MAIN ENTRANCE, EVENTS HALL, LIBRARY AND DRAMA STUDIO AND ADDITIONAL PARKING

Permission 27

P/07/0474/FP 38 TAWNY OWL CLOSE, STUBBINGTON ERECTION OF TWO STOREY FRONT AND

SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS Permission 28

P/07/0552/FP NEWGATE LANE - FOCUS DIY SITE -,

FAREHAM

ERECTION OF RESTAURANT (CLASS A3) ON SURPLUS CAR PARK

Refuse 29

P/07/0564/FP 105 BURNT HOUSE LANE - LAND

ADJACENT TO - STUBBINGTON

ERECTION OF DETACHED CHALET BUNGALOW

Permission 30

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-6-

TITCHFIELD P/07/0631/TO SEGENSWORTH ROAD - 181A & 183 -

FAREHAM

REMOVE 5 BRANCHES FROM MONKEY PUZZLE TREE, REMOVE LOWER LIMB & CUT BACK 2 LIMBS FROM OAK TREE COVERED BY FTPO 489

Consent 3

TITCHFIELD COMMON P/07/0545/OA 379 HUNTS POND ROAD, TITCHFIELD

COMMON

ERECTION OF DETACHED BUNGALOW WITH INTEGRAL GARAGE (OUTLINE APPLICATION)

Outline Permission

4

WARSASH P/07/0591/FP 288 WARSASH ROAD, TITCHFIELD

COMMON

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING DWELLING AND ERECTION OF NEW DWELLING

Permission 5

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-7-

ZONE 1 – WESTERN WARDS Locks Heath Park Gate Sarisbury Titchfield Titchfield Common Warsash

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-8-

(1) P/07/0521/FP LOCKS HEATH MR & MRS BROOM

ERECTION OF TWO STOREY 25 THE GLADES SIDE/REAR EXTENSION AND LOCKS HEATH FRONT CANOPY OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description

This application relates to a semi-detached dwelling to the west of the Glades which is accessed via Headland Drive. There is an attached pitch roof garage to the north of the dwelling.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to erect a two storey extension on the northern side of the dwelling, which would extend to the rear of the dwelling. A lean-to single storey feature is proposed in front of the main wall of the house. The two storey extension would be brought forward level with the front wall of the house and would extend 2 metres further to the rear of the existing house wall. Overall the two storey extension would measure 9.65m in depth, 2.75 metres in width at the front and 6 metres in width at the rear. The ridge height would be the same as the existing property at 7.7 metres. It is proposed to remove the garage and replace it with habitable rooms. Two car parking spaces would be provided on the frontage of the site as part of the application. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Representations One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:

Loss of light and air;

The size of the extension would be out of character with the area;

Loss of parking. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Comments The objector’s property to the north-east has two windows at first floor level within the side elevation. The distance between the proposed two storey side

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-9-

extension and these windows would be approx 2 metres. These windows are obscure glazed and serve a bathroom and landing, neither of which are habitable rooms. Officers therefore do not consider that the proposal would have a significantly detrimental impact on the neighbouring property in terms of loss of light. There is a variety of properties in the area, some are detached and some are semi-detached and there is a variety of sizes. Officers do not consider that the proposed extension would result in a property which would be out of keeping with the surrounding area in terms of its size or visual appearance. There are no conditions attached to the original permission preventing the conversion of the garage to a habitable room and therefore this could be done without planning permission. However the applicant has demonstrated that two vehicles could be parked on the drive in a satisfactory manner. Officers are of the opinion that two parking spaces would be sufficient for a four bedroom property in this location. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable.

RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match, Remove PD first floor (north & south), parking BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0521/FP

(2) P/07/0471/CU PARK GATE

MR STEPHEN WHITEWOOD

CHANGE OF USE TO MIXED 266 BROOK LANE RESIDENTIAL & BUSINESS USE SARISBURY GREEN (TO ALLOW CHILDMINDING FOR 12 CHILDREN UNDER 8 YEARS OLD) OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description/Introduction This application relates to a detached dwelling to the south of Brook Lane on the corner of Highnam Gardens. The applicant and his wife currently operate a child minding business from the property caring for up to 8 children. The business involves two services, namely taking children to and from school (wrap-around-care) and day caring for varying hours for children under 5 years of age. This involves local parents who may work locally or further a field and parents working locally who travel from further a field.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-10-

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to change the use of the property to mixed residential/business use in connection with the use of the property for childminding for up to 12 children under the age of 8 years. A detailed description of how the business currently operates, and changes planned, has been submitted by the applicant and his wife. It is said that traffic flow and parking in connection with the use has been achieved by them having excellent relationships with parents:

they are encouraged to walk to the site;

stagger arrival and departure times;

strictly adhere whenever possible to contracted times;

collect and return children to and from their homes and school playgrounds;

insist that afternoon school run children use the school bus service from their schools to Lockswood Road where they are collected and walked up Highnam Gardens to the site.

Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG1, DG3, DG5 and T5.

Representations Three letters have been received raising concerns/objecting on the following grounds:

Highway safety;

Cars are parked on Brook Lane or in Highnam Gardens;

Insufficient parking;

Increased noise. Consultations Director of Regulatory Services – No objection Chief Planning and Transportation Officer - No objection subject to the provision of satisfactory parking upon the site. Comments The applicant and his wife currently operate a childminding business from the property caring for eight children. Although the business does not at present benefit from planning permission no complaints were received by the Council before the application was submitted in respect of noise or traffic. The property has a double garage for the applicant’s own vehicles and there is sufficient room to park another two vehicles leaving room to turn on site. The

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-11-

applicant does not always use the double garage for the parking of cars and therefore a plan has been requested to extend the hardsurfaced drive area allowing the applicants two vehicles to be parked on the frontage without reducing the availability of parking and turning for those delivering and collecting children. Due to the nature of the business the arrival and departure times of children are staggered. The applicant has advised that arrival and departure times are subject to a contract with parents and that the times are staggered to reduce the number of vehicles arriving and departing from the property at once. A number of the children are related or arrive and depart on foot further reducing traffic movements at the property. Ofsted (who are responsible for registration of such uses) have advised that they would permit the care of 9 children under the age of 5 years at the property. Therefore during term times there would be a maximum of 9 children present at the property during school hours. This may increase up to 12 children under the age of 8 yrs immediately before and after school but it is not anticipated that this would be everyday. This would represent an increase of 1 child at the property during school hours. Bearing in mind the proposed limited increase in the number of children officers do not consider that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the neighbouring properties in terms of loss of residential amenities. However, concern has been raised by the local residents about traffic/parking issues, but the applicant is in agreement with a temporary permission being granted for a one year period to allow the situation to be re-assessed in one years time. Officers consider that the proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and to be acceptable. RECOMMEND: Subject to: the receipt of a satisfactory parking layout. PERMISSION: No more than 12 children present at any one time; Parking, Temporary permission one year BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0471/CU

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-12-

(3) P/07/0631/TO TITCHFIELD

MR & MRS WHITAKER

REMOVE 5 BRANCHES FROM MONKEY SEGENSWORTH ROAD - 181A & PUZZLE TREE, REMOVE LOWER LIMB 183 FAREHAM & CUT BACK 2 LIMBS FROM OAK TREE COVERED BY FTPO 489 OFFICERS REPORT - Simon Thompson Ext 4815

Site Description

Consent is sought to carry out works to a Monkey Puzzle tree in the front garden of the semi-detached property at 181A Segensworth Road and an Oak tree next door in the rear garden of a detached property at 183 Segensworth Road. These properties are approximately 45 to 65 metres to the south east of the junction of Segensworth Road with Titchfield Park Road, Segensworth. They are within the urban area of the Borough as defined in the Local Plan Review.

Description of Proposal The works proposed include the removal of the lower five limbs of the Monkey Puzzle tree and the lower limb removal and two lower limbs cut back of the Oak tree. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review: Policy: DG4. Representations One email has been received objecting on the following grounds:

Cannot the Monkey Puzzle tree branches be pruned back rather than removed? The tree has a lovely shape and it would be sad to see this destroyed, especially as the overhang must have been obvious to the buyers of the property rather than it growing up upon them. The Monkey Puzzle is a fine specimen which is apparently under threat in its native habitat.;

Which ever way the decision goes, preference should be towards pruning rather than removal of whole trees.

Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Arborist) – Consent tree works subject to work being undertaken in accordance with BS 3998 (1989) Comments

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-13-

The Council’s Arborist reports that the proposed tree works were subject to pre-application discussions with the applicant and that the works are to be undertaken for sound arboricultural management reasons in order to increase separation distances between the trees and the dwelling. He goes on to state that the proposed works will have no significant adverse impact on public amenity. In light of the above comments of the Council’s Arborist, officers consider the proposal is acceptable.

RECOMMEND: CONSENT: Works to be undertaken within two years; Works in accordance with BS 3998 (1989); Specification of works permitted. Further Information: Notice of when tree works is to be begun BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0631/TO

(4) P/07/0545/OA/O TITCHFIELD COMMON

MR & MRS R MATHEWS Agent: MR ROGER WILDIG

ERECTION OF DETACHED BUNGALOW 379 HUNTS POND ROAD WITH INTEGRAL GARAGE (OUTLINE TITCHFIELD COMMON APPLICATION) OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description This application relates to land to the rear of 379 Hunts Pond Road currently forming part of a large rear garden. The application site lies to the east of Hunts Pond Road close to the junction with Warsash Road. The application site lies immediately to the west of the Hunts Pond Road Housing Allocation site. Description of Proposal Outline permission is sought to erect a detached bungalow with integral garage. The matters to be considered at this stage are layout, means of access and landscaping. Scale and External appearance are reserved matters. Policies

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-14-

Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies –DG1, DG3, DG5, H2, T5 and R5. Representations One letter has been received raising the following concerns:

Surface water;

Drainage.

Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection subject to provision of plan to demonstrate that a vehicle could reverse out of the proposed garage and turn on site. Director of Regulatory Services – No objection subject to conditions Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Arborist) – No objection Comments The site lies within the urban area where residential infilling; redevelopment and development on neglected and underused land will be permitted, providing it does not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area or amenity of existing residents. The existing property on the site has a large rear garden approx 46 metres in length. The proposed bungalow would be served by an existing 3.8 metre wide hard surfaced access to the north side of No.379 Hunts Pond Road, which currently serves the property garage. This garage would be demolished to erect the proposed bungalow.

The neighbouring properties to the north and south also have large rear gardens and it is considered that the positioning of the bungalow a minimum of some 20 metres down the length of these gardens would ensure that the bungalow would not have an adverse impact on the residential amenities of these properties. A condition would be attached to ensure that the bungalow would be single storey securing the privacy of the neighbouring properties. There is a multi-species hedge to the north of the proposed access road, and it is proposed to erect a 1.8 metre close boarded fence on the northern boundary of the existing dwelling to screen the rear garden.

The occupants of the neighbouring property to the north have expressed concern that the erection of the dwelling and associated hardsurfacing would result in problems with surface water drainage. The details of displaying of surface water from the dwelling itself would be dealt with under the buildings regulation application. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-15-

RECOMMEND: Subject to i) the applicant entering into a Section 106 planning obligation on terms drafted by the Solicitor to the Council to secure an appropriate financial contribution towards the provision and/or enhancement of public open space and/or recreational facilities by 19 June 2007. ii) the receipt of satisfactory plan demonstrating the capacity to reverse a vehicle out of the garage and turn on site GRANT OUTLINE PERMISSION: Submission of reserved matters scale and external appearance, single storey eaves height with no accommodation/windows within roofslope, Contamination, Remove PD rights, Materials to be submitted, Parking, Boundary Treatment, Levels, No mud on road, No burning on site, Construction Hours OR: In the event that a section 106 agreement is not entered into by 19 June 2007; REFUSE: Contrary to policy; absence of contribution to the improvement or enhancement of local open space and recreational facilities. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0545/OA

(5) P/07/0591/FP WARSASH

A P COX Agent: MR D E GIDDINGS

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING 288 WARSASH ROAD DWELLING AND ERECTION OF TITCHFIELD COMMON NEW DWELLING OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description

This application relates to a site to the south of Warsash Road immediately opposite the junction with Locks Heath Park Road.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to demolish the existing bungalow and erect a replacement 5-bedroom dwelling of the same design as permitted scheme taking the form of extensions to the bungalow. Policies

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-16-

Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG1, DG3, DG5, H2 and T5. Relevant Planning History P/07/0032/FP Erection of Two Storey Side, Rear and Front Extensions Permission 6 March 2007 Representations The neighbour notification period expires 5 June 2007. At the time of writing this report one letter had been received objecting on the following grounds:

Where will construction traffic park?

The rear boundary does not have a well established hedge as stated on the application.

Any letters subsequently received will be reported at the committee meeting. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Director of Regulatory Services – No objection Comments An application was permitted earlier this year which would have resulted in the existing dwelling being extended to appear the same as the replacement dwelling now proposed. Problems have arisen because the existing foundations are too shallow and of inadequate size to support the additional floor, wall and roof loads which would be imposed upon them as a result of the permitted extensions. Thus it has become apparent that it would be easier to reconstruct the whole dwelling to meet all aspects of the current Building Regulations. Warsash Road is characterised by a variety of different types and style of dwelling. Although there are bungalows either side of the application site there are two storey properties on the opposite side of the road. It is therefore not considered that the dwelling would be out of character with the surrounding area. The neighbouring property to the east is at a higher level due to the slope of the land therefore although the proposed dwelling would be higher than the existing property it is not considered that this would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the streetscene. The site is also well screened to the front by established planting, which will remain. The objector is concerned that the design and access statement states that the rear boundary is a well-established hedge. The rear boundary is marked by a fence which is in a poor state of repair however there is established planting on the boundary which it is not presently easy to see beyond. A

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-17-

condition could be imposed requiring further details of boundary treatment to be submitted. It is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties to the east and west. At its closest point the proposed dwelling would be 5 metres from the property to the west and 7.5 metres from the property to the east. The existing access would be used and there would be parking and turning on site for a minimum of 3 vehicles. Concern has been raised about construction traffic, but a condition can be imposed requiring the submission of details of a construction compound with parking facilities. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to be submitted, Boundary Treatment, Levels, Parking, Hours of Construction, No mud on the road, No burning on site, Obscure glaze & fix shit to 1.7m first floor window (west), Remove PD first floor (east & west), compound details. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0591/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-18-

ZONE 2 – FAREHAM North North West West East South

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-19-

(6) P/07/0575/FP FAREHAM EAST PORTSMOUTH HOUSING ASSCN LTD Agent: KENN SCADDAN ASSOCIATES LTD

ERECTION OF HOUSE OF MULTIPLE 2 KINGS ROAD - ASSEMBLY OCCUPATION WITH 9 BEDROOMS, HALL - FAREHAM COMMUNAL FACILITIES, OFFICE, CYCLE AND BIN STORAGE OFFICERS REPORT - Tony Boswell Ext 2526

Site Description

The site is that of the former Assembly Hall on Kings Road, a little to the south of the junction of Kings Road and West Street, on its eastern side, which is owned by Fareham Borough Council.

Description of Proposal The proposal consists of a two storey building, designed as a pair of semi-detached Edwardian houses, very similar to the houses elsewhere on the Kings Road frontage. It would provide nine en-suite bedrooms, including one for disabled occupation, together with kitchens, a utility room, lounge and other communal facilities. A conservatory and courtyard garden would be to the rear, with secure cycle storage. The applicant’s Design and Access Statement includes the following explanation of the proposed use:- “The applicant for the proposal is Portsmouth Housing Association, who will develop the scheme. They will work in partnership with Two Saints Housing Association who, having been awarded Supporting People funding, will manage the dry house. The requirement for a Clean and Dry House in Fareham is included within Fareham Borough Council’s Homelessness Review. The aim of the scheme is to provide accommodation and support to people in the area following treatment for alcohol or other drug related problems. The project is designed to promote independent living and to move residents on to a more settled way of life. It is the final stage in the rehabilitation process, i.e. after recovery from substance misuse the scheme aims to provide the vital stepping stone of a safe and secure place to live. Three staff will support the residents and manage the scheme. There will be no overnight staffing but the managers will be on call for 24 hours and attend out of hours if necessary”. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review policies H2, H16, H8, DG3, DG5, R5, Fareham Borough Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance: “Crime Reduction Through Design”

Relevant Planning History

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-20-

Various temporary planning permissions were granted for uses within the former Assembly Hall, including use as a “night shelter” for up to 16 homeless persons. Representations Eights letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:

Location is unsuitable as close to needle exchange, public houses and off license, local people will be housed – so their location will be known to local users;

Suggest that a 66% failure rate is to be expected – the use should not be allowed in an area inhabited by young families;

Loss of value in house, in addition to the PHA development on Queens Road frontage;

Customers of local pubs already cause disruption and disorderly behaviour;

Residents will feel intimidated;

Concerned at the poor running or management of the former night shelter;

Staff of the nearby dental practice at 8 Kings Road “would not feel safe”;

Will aggravate local on-street parking conditions;

Requesting that rear access should be provided to 116/118 West Street via the application site. (Rear Access is not currently available to this property but, via the adjoining development by PHA might be possible, subject to private treaty between the parties concerned).

A Petition has been submitted in two parts with a total of 108 signatures from residents of Homefayre House, Kings Road and other streets in proximity who have signed their names to – “We the undersigned object to the proposal to build the clean and dry scheme on the Kings Road Assembly Rooms site”. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer – no objection but suggest that a Travel Plan should be provided to promote alternative and sustainable means of travel Director of Regulatory Services (EHO) – no objection, but drawing attention to internal space standards agreed with HCC for houses in multiple occupation. Director of Regulatory Services (Pollution and Housing) – no objection, but asking for condition regarding possible site contamination Housing Strategy Manager – “Proposals to provide a Clean and Dry Facility in Fareham were agreed by the former Housing Review Panel arising from a need established through the Council’s Homelessness Strategy. The proposals are in accordance with the identified needs and are therefore

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-21-

supported by the Strategic Housing Division. The scheme has also been endorsed by the Community Safety Partnership”. Comments In architectural and design terms the proposal is entirely sympathetic and, in terms of design and scale, would be very compatible with existing buildings on the same frontage. No car parking is provided but, in view of the central area location, and the provision of secure cycle storage, there are no grounds to suppose that traffic or parking problems might arise. The CP&TO’s point about a Travel Plan is understood, but in view of the specific circumstances of that residents, and the close proximity to both train and bus stations, travel by residents will tend to be by modes other than the car. Additionally, although there is competition for available on-street parking provision, there are public car parks in proximity. Residents and staff attending are likely to create less demand for parking provision than any alternative form of residential development, and a number of centrally located new dwellings have been permitted without specific parking provision. Future residents would presumably make use of local open space and recreational facilities, albeit that town centre facilities are in closer proximity. It is unlikely that future residents will make significantly greater use of facilities than occupants of the former night shelter and, on the basis that there would be no net additional use of recreational facilities. Officers have not sought any contribution towards improvement of local open space or recreational facilities under Policy R5. Potential Crime and Disorder In the view of officers the key issue in this case is the nature of the proposed use, and a perceived potential for unlawful or disorderly behaviour by future residents. This is only one of the considerations to be taken into account and the weight that is given to crime prevention depends on the individual circumstances of the case. It is important that crime prevention is balanced with other design criteria leading to an attractive, safe and high quality environment. Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 imposes a duty on the Council to have regard to the crime and disorder implications of its decisions and the need to do all it reasonably can to prevent crime and disorder in its area. This duty applies to all of the Council's functions and not only the determination of planning applications. In that light the proposal has been considered by the Community Safety Partnership on the 17th of May, which involved all of the relevant parties, including the local police. The report and minutes of that meeting included the following, which are of relevance to issues of crime and disorder generally throughout Fareham, and the proposed site in particular:

“ The introduction of the scheme should help towards a reduction in drug and alcohol related crime;

It should encourage and support continued abstinence;

It should help to meet the homelessness strategy target and from the local authority’s point of view help towards preventing homelessness

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-22-

Whilst overall the scheme was supported, during discussion on the proposal, concerns were expressed about how robust the admissions process would be, the need to work with the right agencies (and key professionals) and reservations regarding the proposed location and its proximity to licensed premised.

It was AGREED that:-

(a) in principle, Fareham Community Safety Partnership endorsed the proposed scheme for a dry house in Fareham, as outlined in the presentation;

(b) account be taken of the comments made at the meeting

expressing reservations about the proposed location of the dry house; and

(c) account be taken of concerns expressed at the meeting

regarding the need for a robust admissions process”.

Since that meeting planning officers have been supplied with documentation which enlarges on the proposed admissions policy and the 17 “rules” which residents would have to sign to before admission. These include:

“(1) All residents will abstain from using all mood altering chemicals, including alcohol and solvents. … (2) Residents are not permitted to associate or spend any time with anyone in active drug/alcohol use. (5) To refrain from any form of violent/threatening/intimidating behaviour towards other residents, staff or members of the public. This behaviour will not be tolerated at Kings Road. Anyone in breach of the above will be asked to leave and the local police informed (7) All residents will undergo random alcohol/drug tests. (9) No criminal activity in any form will be tolerated: any suspicion or evidence of this behaviour will result in being asked to leave the project and the police informed. (10) There will be a curfew in place for all residents between the hours of 2200 – 07.30 … (15) Residents will not enter any licensed premises in the local area. (16) Residents will not harass or disrupt the lives of any neighbours to the project or local community, this will be deemed a serious breach?.

In this particular case the Council clearly has an acknowledged interest in the proposal as one aspect of its Homelessness Strategy. It is especially important that the evaluation of these issues should be rigorous. The proposed building and use is primarily “residential” in character, and it is appropriate that it should be located in a primarily residential area. Proximity to public transport and town centre facilities and services is clearly very desirable – and are not in themselves in conflict with the Council’s duty to prevent crime and disorder. (See the rules above). In the view of officers the key issue is thus whether there is anything inherently unsuitable about the proposed location in planning terms, or an alternative location which might be more appropriate.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-23-

The fact that the same location has historically been used as a night shelter, via temporary planning permissions which were renewed on a number of occasions is significant –in framing a judgement about the sensitivity of the location to issues of such supposed disorderly conduct. Unlike the managed and supervised lives of future residents of the proposed “dry house” (who will have been pre-selected for occupation, and subject to sanction in the event of unacceptable conduct), homeless persons making use of the former night shelter were if anything “self selecting” and relatively un-supervised when outside the former night shelter. As an actual or potential threat, members of the public leaving nearby licensed premises are similarly un-supervised, and potentially likely to be more of a problem in terms of crime and disorder than future residents of the proposed use. Proximity to local public houses and the needle exchange might place temptation in the way of future residents but, if that increases the rate at which residents are returned to treatment, then that is a case management issue for Two Saints, rather than a planning consideration as such. Any such use must accept the likelihood that some residents will “fail” – regardless of the location where they reside. Residents of the proposed dry house are risk assessed, before and after taking up occupation, and would be removed/relocated on a same day basis in the event of failure. An objector suggests that a 66% failure rate is to be expected. When asked, the applicants do not accept that assertion and the failure rate in using such a dry house approach is typically much lower than 66%. Reference has been made to a similar facility in Portsmouth known as DASH. This accommodates up to seven persons and has been open since 1997. During that time only one resident has been evicted and one more was returned to treatment. All other residents moved on to other accommodation, evidently without subsequent relapse. The potentially useful influence of such facilities upon reducing drug related crime and disorder is thus clear. The relevant planning consideration is whether occasional “failures” might add to existing levels of crime and disorder generally, or in the Kings Road area in particular. Officers conclude that this is an appropriate location for such a use. Residents arriving at the proposed use would not be active users of alcohol or drugs, and would be individually risk assessed before occupation. The three members of staff would be employed to prevent or minimize any such possibility by support and enforcement of the rules outlined above. That process of management and enforcement is inherent in the use applied for. Conclusion For entirely understandable reasons this proposal has attracted a good deal of public opposition. The proposed use is not merely a matter of accommodating a number of persons who might on the face of it pose a threat to local crime and disorder. The use includes a process of management, supervision and enforcement which in practice are the central purpose of the proposed building. As a facility, the intended effect of the proposed use would be to reduce overall levels of drug related crime and disorder in the Fareham area. In physical and design terms the proposal appears entirely acceptable. In considering this planning application and in the absence of “demonstrable

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-24-

harm to interests of acknowledged importance”, it follows that subject to necessary planning conditions, permission should be granted. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: External materials, levels, permission specific to use (Use Class C2), desk top study of site contamination, management arrangements, construction hours, no mud on highway, cycle and refuse areas to be constructed and made available, boundary treatment. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0575/FP

(7) P/07/0395/VC FAREHAM NORTH

SOUTH COAST CATERING

VARIATION OF CONDITION 4 OF STATION APPROACH - MOBILE P/06/1396/VC (TO ALLOW MOBILE CATERING VAN - FAREHAM CATERING VAN TO REMAIN OPEN ADJACENT TO PRAGUE NOW PRAGUE JUNCTION HAS JUNCTION CLOSED OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412 Introduction

This application was considered at the last Planning Development Control meeting on 16th May 2007. The determination of the application was deferred an order for statistical information and evidence to be received from Hampshire Constabulary. The police have been asked to set out what evidence there is of crimes associated with use of the catering van since Prague Junction closed. The police have provided the following details: For the period from 1st January 2006 to 5th December 2006 whilst Prague Junction was open the following crimes were recorded on the Police Record Management system at Station Approach: 34 Assaults 11 Criminal Damages 2 Drunkenness Offences 2 Drug related incidents 22 Public Order offences 16 Rowdy and Inconsiderate 1 Threats to kill Then from 6th December 2006 to 22nd May 2007 (for a shorter period) the following figures were recorded at Station Approach: 3 Assaults 1 Criminal Damage 2 Public Order Offences

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-25-

9 Rowdy and Inconsiderate 1 Threats to kill The police believe that these figures highlight that even with Prague Junction closed the mobile catering van is a source of crime and disorder and suggest that these figures would be higher by the end of this year. They consider that the location of the site makes it attractive to drunks and people trying to cause trouble. The police consider that there are no other ‘attractions’ in this location and it is the mobile catering van that brings people to the area in the evening. Officers consider that the train station, bus station and taxi rank are also significant attractions in the locality and so it is important to establish whether there is evidence of crimes directly relocated to use of the mobile catering van or not. In summary, therefore, the police have been asked whether there is a causal relationship between the crimes that have occurred and the mobile catering van. Officers are of the view that it would be unreasonable to refuse consent unless this relationship could be demonstrated. This specific issue arose over six years ago at a local public inquiry about use of an earlier refreshment van here (relating to refusal of an application for an extension of the hours of operation) which was adjoined to establishment whether there was such a coastal relationship or not. In the event there was not evidence of such a casual relationship and the police withdraw their objection. It has been suggested to the police that the mobile catering van should be permitted to continue operating until 31 May 2008 when the temporary permission expires. This would allow a reasonable amount of time for the police to monitor and then re-assess the situation next year. A response to their suggestion is awaited from the police. An update will be provided at the committee meeting. Site Description This application relates to the mobile catering van located adjacent to the former Prague Junction nightclub near Fareham Railway Station.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to retain the mobile catering van now the nightclub has closed. Condition 4 of P/06/1396/FP states that use of the mobile catering van shall cease upon the cessation of the use of the adjoining premises (known as Prague Junction). The nightclub has now closed.

Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG1, DG3 and S12.

Relevant Planning History

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-26-

P/05/0423/VC Relief from Condition 2 of P/00/0593/FP (To allow

Permanent Siting of Mobile Catering Van) Permission 24 May 2005

P/06/1396/VC Variation of Condition 2 of P/00/0593/FP (To Allow van to

Trade between hours of 7am -1pm Monday to Sunday Permission 5 December 2006

Representations No letters have been received. Consultations

Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection

Director of Regulatory Services (Environmental Health) – No objection

Hampshire Constabulary – The police have raised an objection on the grounds of prevention of crime and disorder and prevention of public nuisance. With the closure of Prague Junction there are no longer the customers that frequented that venue to service. Drunken individuals it is said are therefore making a detour from elsewhere to buy products from this van. It is felt that there is no requirement for the catering van and its removal will assist in reducing crime within the area.

Comments

Permission was granted for the continued use of the mobile catering van in December 2006. The permitted hours of use are 07:00-13:00 everyday and 19:00-01:00 everyday extending to 02:30 on Friday and Saturday nights. The use has a temporary permission expiring on 31 May 2008. Although the nightclub has now closed the owner of the mobile catering van wishes to continue trading from this location. The mobile catering van is located in a good position to catch passing trade from the train station and taxi rank. Although some customers may be coming to the area solely to visit the mobile catering van it is located on an industrial estate and there are no residential properties immediately adjacent to the catering van through there is older persons accommodation adjacent to the access to the station. It is considered that there are few locations in the Borough which would be as suitable for such a use. Equally there will be an opportunity to review the use next year when the temporary permission expires. In the absence of specific evidence limiting crimes with one of the catering vans, officers consider that the proposal is acceptable and as explained above the use has a temporary permission which will allow the circumstances to be reviewed once the current permission expires.

RECOMMEND:

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-27-

Subject to: the response from Hampshire Constabulary regarding crime linked to use of the catering van:

PERMISSION: Temporary permission 31 May 2008, Opening hours, Mobile Van as approved

BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0395/VC

(8) P/07/0630/FP FAREHAM NORTH

MR & MRS N THOMAS

DEMOLITION OF SINGLE GARAGE 4 CHAUCER CLOSE AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY FAREHAM REAR EXTENSION AND TWO STOREY SIDE/REAR EXTENSION OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to a semi-detached dwelling on the west side of Chaucer Close which is to the south of Beaufort Avenue.

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for, (i) a single storey rear extension which measures 2.6 metres in width, 4 metres in depth with an eaves height of 2.5 metres. (ii) two storey side/rear extension which measures 3.5 metres in width, 7.820 metres in depth with an eaves height of 4.8 metres and a ridge height of 7.5 metres. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review – DG3 and DG5 Representations One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:

Incorrect description;

over development/excessive;

overlooking/loss of privacy;

visually intrusive and overbearing impact on neighbouring properties;

poor external design, appearance and layout.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-28-

Comments This application relates to a semi-detached property on the west side of Chaucer Close which is off Beaufort Avenue. The proposal consists of a single storey rear extension which is the continuation of an existing rear extension at the same depth and a two storey side/rear extension which is proposed on the south side of the property. Concerns have been raised that the proposal would create overlooking and loss of privacy however officers are of the view that as the proposed windows face directly down the garden to the rear, the proposed new windows would not create an unacceptable level of overlooking. The two storey extension would be sited one metre off the southern boundary at its nearest point increasing to 2.7 metres. The neighbouring property to the south is orientated towards the south west away from the application site; the two storey element is also set a distance of 5.2 metre from the northern boundary. In light of this separation officers consider that the extension would not be overbearing to either neighbouring properties. The design of the proposed extension would be in accordance with the Approved Extension Design Guide and includes subservience. Officers consider that the application complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and the Approved Extension Design Guide. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match, withdraw Pd rights on the north and south elevations at first floor level. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0630/FP

(9) P/07/0455/CU FAREHAM NORTH-WEST

MR NICK GREGORY

CHANGE OF USE OF PUBLIC OPEN HENRY CORT DRIVE - NORTH SPACE TO CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA WEST COMMUNITY CENTRE -

& ERECTION OF FENCING FAREHAM OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412 This application has been called on to the agenda by Councillor Peter Davies.

Site Description This application relates to the North West Community Centre located to the north of Henry Cort Drive, which is located within a small building surrounded by an area of open space owned by Fareham Borough Council.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-29-

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to enclose an area of land immediately to the south of the community centre for use as an outdoor play area for the childrens day care group that operates from the centre. The area would be enclosed by a 1.2 metre high open metal rail fence and would measure 7.5 metres by 16.5 metres. Policies Fareham Borough Council Local Plan Review Policies: DG1, DG3, R3, C11.

Representations No letters have been received Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Director of Regulatory Services (Environmental Health– No objection Leisure and Community– No objection Comments Policy R3 of the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review protects public open space including public and private playing fields, allotments and informal open space unless a replacement site is provided which is equivalent in terms of accessibility, size and quality. However paragraph 8.32 states that redevelopment of a small part of the site may be acceptable to provide an appropriate recreation or community use which is important to the life of local people. The play area would be used by a Children’s nursery which officers consider is an appropriate community use. It is considered that the enclosure of the play area with metal railing painted blue will be in keeping with the surrounding area. The equipped play area to the north is enclosed with a similar fence. A separate area is proposed to meet the registration requirements of the day care group. It is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact to the visual amenities of the area. The play area would not be visible from Henry Court Drive as there is a hedge separating the open space from the road.

Officers consider that the proposal is acceptable and complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Railings to match

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-30-

BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0455/CU

(10) P/07/0556/AD FAREHAM NORTH-WEST

MRS DIANA WARBURG Agent: STEPHENS COX ASSOCIATES

PROVISION OF LIGHTING TO NEW OAK MEADOW EARLY YEARS SIGNAGE NEAR SITE BOUNDARY CENTRE - TEWKESBURY AVENUE FAREHAM OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to a school which can be accessed of Tewesbury Avenue and Nashe Way to the east of Hillson Drive

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for the provision of an externally illuminated sign mounted on two posts measuring 2.705 metres in height, 1.250 metres in with and 0.450 metres in depth. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policy: DG7. Representations One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:

Could affect night lights in children rooms;

also feel this will attract unsavoury kinds, as lit area to cause antisocial behaviour;

seriously devaluing the value of my property. Consultations Chief Planning & Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Comments This application has been submitted for the provision of a sign on the north side of Nash way at the entrance of Oak Meadow Early Years Centre which is located within Oak Meadow school campus.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-31-

The proposal also includes a lamp column which would over hang the top of the sign in the form of a down lighter and will face the sign in order to illuminate after dark. The nearest residential property is some 20 metres away to the west. Concern has been raised that the proposed sign would affect neighbouring properties; however, officers would impose a planning condition restricting the illumination level of the proposed lamp to a level suitable within a residential location.

Officer’s consider the proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: illumination limited to 600 candelas BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0556/AD

(11) P/07/0522/FP/O FAREHAM SOUTH

MR JAMES FELTHAM Agent: MR ANTHONY GLADMAN

PROVISION OF NEW REAR DORMER 66 ST MICHAELS GROVE AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY FAREHAM REAR EXTENSION OFFICERS REPORT - Simon Thompson Ext 4815

Site Description

The application relates to a dwelling within a terrace situated on the western side of St Michaels Grove close to the junction with Fairfield Avenue.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought for:

The erection of a new flat roof rear dormer;

The erection of a single storey rear extension.

The single storey rear extension would replace and be larger (by being 2.3 metres deeper) than an existing conservatory at the rear of this property. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review - Policies DG3 and DG5 Relevant Planning History

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-32-

P/96/0153/FP – Erection of Conservatory at 66 St Michaels Grove - Permission 9 April 1996. P/06/0721/FP – Erection of Rear Dormer at 64 St Michaels Grove – Permission 13 July 2006 Representations No letter or email has been received regarding this application and the consultation period has now closed.

Comments In July 2006 permission was granted for a rear, flat roofed, dormer at 64 St Michaels Grove by Planning Development Control Committee. This has now been built at the neighbouring property. The proposed rear dormer at 66 St Michaels Grove is also planned to have a flat roof to it but would extend slightly further across the roof slope. This dormer is however, considered acceptable having little impact upon the street scene and being similar in details to the dormers on the next property. The proposed rear extension would be 2.3 metres deeper than the existing 3.65 metre deep conservatory at the rear of this property. However, the proposed rear extension would be of the same depth as an existing rear extension at 68 St Michaels Grove immediately to the south. The proposed rear extension would be about 2.6 metres deeper than an existing 3.3 metre deep conservatory to the rear of 64 St Michaels Grove to the north. In light of the existing extension and conservatory either side of the proposed extension, the proposed single storey rear extension to 66 St Michaels Grove is considered acceptable, complying with the Council’s Approved Extension Design Guide and relevant local plan policy.

RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0522/FP, P/06/0721/FP and P/96/0153/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-33-

(12) P/07/0553/FP FAREHAM SOUTH

NEIL BANTING & JILL PHELAN

ERECTION OF FIRST FLOOR REAR 42 REDLANDS LANE EXTENSION FAREHAM OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to a semi-detached dwelling on the east side of Redlands Lane which is to the west of Paxton Road.

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for a first floor rear extension which measures 3.050 metres in depth, 3.660 metres in width with an eaves height of 7 metres and a ridge height of 7.5 metres. Policies

Fareham Borough Local Plan Review: DG3 and DG5. Representations One letter has been received raising concerns about:

width of the extension in relation to the width of the house;

proportion, balance and overall appearance of the extension;

reduction of light to the bedroom at the rear of their property;

loss of view from the bedroom which would be substantial and unacceptable.

Comments There is currently a single storey rear extension across the full width of the property and this proposal is to erect a first floor extension above a little over half of it, at its southern end. The extension would be some 2.2 metres from the boundaries of each neighbouring property. The objection received raises concern about the width of the extension, its proportion, balance and overall appearance. Officers are of the view that the proposed design and appearance of the extension would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the building, neighbouring properties or the locality.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-34-

Concern is also raised regarding the reduction of light and loss and view to a bedroom window on the dwelling to the south. Officers have considered the extension in relation to neighbouring windows and the proposed extension would not impede the 45 degree angle from any of the windows on either neighbouring property. Officer are therefore of the view that the proposed extension would not have a detrimental impact on the neighbours light or outlook. Officers consider that the application is acceptable since it complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and the Approved Extension Design Guide. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match, withdraw pd rights at first floor level north and south elevations BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0553/FP

(13) P/07/0554/FP FAREHAM SOUTH as amended by plans received 31st May 2007 MR J MEDLOW

PROVISION OF REPLACEMENT ROOF 29 COOMBE FARM AVENUE INCORPORATING FRONT DORMER FAREHAM AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION OFFICERS REPORT - Simon Thompson Ext 4815

Site Description

The application relates to a detached bungalow situated on the western side of Coombe Farm Avenue, Fareham, approximately 135 metres to the north of its junction with Mill Road.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought for:

The provision of a replacement roof with a ridge height of 6.1 metres compared to the existing roof 5.45 metres ridge height, incorporating a hipped roof dormer window in the front slope of this raised roof;

Erection of a single storey rear extension measuring 4.8 metres in width, 2.75 metres in depth and covered by a barn hip, which at its lowest is 5 metres above ground level, at the rear end of the new roof referred to above.

Policies

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-35-

Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Relevant Planning History FBC.4616/19 – Erection of rear extension - Permission November 1976 Representations Two letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:

The proposed height of the roof is far too high and will block out considerable sunlight to the neighbouring properties to the north and south;

Loss of privacy affecting both front and rear garden;

The height is not in-keeping with existing properties and should be restricted.

Comments This application has been amended since submission. The application as originally submitted proposed a roof extension with a ridge height of 6.95 metres. The existing ridge height measures 5.45 metre ridge height. As the result of negotiations with Officers and in light of the objections received by neighbours either side, amended plans have now been provided that show the height of this roof being a maximum of 6.1 metres above ground level. This is an increase of 0.65 metres instead of 1.5 metres as originally submitted. In addition the design of the proposed front dormer has been amended to a hipped rather than a flat roof, so to accord with the Council’s Extension Design Guide. The height of the proposed roof is similar to other bungalows in Coombe Farm Avenue, including its immediate neighbours. It is considered by Officers that the ridge height as now proposed would not be tout of character with the street scene. In terms of effect on outlook from and light to the residential properties either side; 27 Coombe Farm Avenue is some 6 metres away to the south from the proposed development when taken from the nearest habitable room. In respect of 31 Coombe Farm Avenue to the north, its side windows are 3 to 3.5 metres away. However, these side windows are small secondary windows serving a habitable room (a lounge) and have their light they receive already dissipated by a translucent car port roof between 31 and 29 Coombe Farm Avenue. In light of the separation between the application site and its neighbours and the nature of the neighbours windows, officers are satisfied that the proposal would not impact on the amenities of the occupiers of these properties. In conclusion therefore, the amended plans received have improved the design of this development. It is considered by Officers that this development would not materially harm the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-36-

properties or impact on the character of the area. No objection is raised in terms of the single storey rear extension element of this development.

RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match; no opening north and south elevation. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0554/FP and FBC.4616/19

(14) P/07/0593/FP FAREHAM SOUTH

WILLIAM HURLOCK Agent: M HALEY

ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR 41 FAIRFIELD AVENUE EXTENSION TO CREATE GROUND FAREHAM FLOOR FLAT & FORMATION OF ROOF TERRACE TO REAR OF FIRST FLOOR FLAT OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description This application relates to an end of terrace property situated within a small parade of commercial units to the south of Fairfield Avenue halfway between the junctions with St Anne’s Grove and St Michael’s Grove. The property includes a vacant retail unit at ground floor level and a 2-bed flat at first floor level. The building is in a poor state of repair. To the rear of the property there is a hard surfaced area with access from St Michaels Grove.

Description of Proposal Planning permission was recently granted for the erection of a single storey rear flat roof extension to provide additional retail space and also for the formation of a first floor roof terrace to serve the first floor flat. Permission is now sought to erect the extension already permitted but for use as a self contained 2-bedroom flat. The extension would be slightly smaller than that already permitted enabling the provision of a yard as amenity space for the additional flat. Planning permission is again sought for the roof terrace to the first floor flat with privacy screens. The property would have 4 car parking spaces to the rear. It is proposed to allocate two of these to the retail unit and two to the ground floor flat. The first floor flat would have a car parking space to the side of the property accessed from Fairfield Avenue.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-37-

Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG1, DG3, DG5, H2, H5, R5 and T5. Relevant Planning History P/07/0136/CU - Erection of Single Storey Rear Extension and Formation of Roof Terrace to Rear at First Floor - Permission 23 March 2007. Representations The neighbour notification period expires 5 June 2007. At the time of writing this report no comments had been received any comments subsequently received will be reported at the committee meeting. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Director of Regulatory Services- Comments awaited Comments The site lies within the urban area where residential infilling; redevelopment and development on neglected and underused land will be permitted, providing it does not adversely affect the character of the surrounding area or amenity of existing residents. It has already been accepted that the erection of the extension with roof terrace would not have an adverse affect on the character of the surrounding area or amenity of existing residents. It is therefore only the use of the extension for a residential flat that raises different issues. The ground floor flat would have some additional windows but these would not result in loss of privacy for the neighbouring dweling due to existing or proposed 1.8 metre boundary fencing. Each flat would be provided with an outside amenity area and the parking provision is considered sufficient. There is unrestricted parking for customers of the retail unit on Fairfield Avenue. The first floor roof terrace, which has previously been permitted, would have 1.8 metre high obscure glass privacy screens to either side to prevent overlooking. The roof terrace would be located 23.5 metres from the rear boundary fence of the properties to the rear and therefore officers do not consider that the roof terrace would result in loss of privacy. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-38-

RECOMMEND: Subject to i) the applicant entering into an agreement under Section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 to secure an appropriate financial contribution towards the provision of and/or enhancement of public open space and/or recreational facilities by 25 June 2007 ii) Comments from the Director of Regulatory Services (Environmental Health) PERMISSION: privacy screens to south-east and north-west, materials to match, boundary treatment, bin storage, car parking, cycle storage OR: In the event that the applicant/owner fails to complete the agreement by 25 June 2007 REFUSE Contrary to policy; absence of contribution to the improvement or enhancement of local open space and recreational facilities. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0593/FP

(15) P/07/0608/FP/O FAREHAM SOUTH as amended by plan received 30 May 2007

MR & MRS S HATCH Agent: MR ANTHONY GLADMAN

CONVERSION OF CONSERVATORY TO 78 REDLANDS LANE FORM REAR EXTENSION WITH FAREHAM PITCHED ROOF OFFICERS REPORT - Simon Thompson Ext 4815

Site Description

The application relates to a terraced house situated on the eastern side of Redlands Lane, Fareham, approximately 45 metres to the south of the road junction of Redlands Lane and Wallisdean Avenue.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought for the provision of a tiled roof incorporating roof lights to convert an existing rear conservatory to an extension. No increase in floor space is proposed. The existing polycarbonate roof of the conservatory would be replaced so it rises up in all by about 1.1 metres instead of the current 0.4 metre, so that its mono-pitched tiled roof would be just below the sills of the first floor rear windows of this two storey house. Policies

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-39-

Fareham Borough Local Plan – Policies: DG3 and DG5. Relevant Planning History P/99/1129/FP – Erection of Replacement Conservatory – Permission November 1999. Representations At the time of writing this Committee report, no letters or emails had been received raising concerns or objections in relation to this planning application. Any views that are received by the end of the consultation period on the 5 June 2007 will be reported to Members in an update report to Committee. Comments There are smaller, existing, rear conservatories at both neighbouring terraced properties either side of 78 Redlands Lane. The effect of replacing the existing polycarbonate roof of the rear conservatory at 78 Redlands Lane with a modest lean-to tiled, roof would be marginal in terms of impact upon these neighbouring conservatories and their occupants’ amenities. In conclusion, the proposal is considered to be acceptable complying with both the Council’s Extension Design Guide and relevant policies of the Local Plan Review. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0608/FP and P/99/1129/FP

(16) P/07/0627/FP FAREHAM SOUTH

RALLS GROUP Agent: RALPH ASSOCIATES

UPGRADE COMMUNITY SPORTS PALMERSTON DRIVE - FACILITIES, PROVIDE NEW ALL FAREHAM TOWN FOOTBALL WEATHER PITCHES AND ERECTION CLUB - FAREHAM OF DRIVING TEST CENTRE OFFICERS REPORT - Joanne Wilson Ext 2679 Introduction Throughout the majority of the year the existing community pitches at Cams

Alders are unusable and inadequate to provide suitable playing surfaces. The nature of the soil and existing drainage facilities are such that during winter months the pitches become waterlogged and during the summer months the surface becomes so hard that their use is a health and safety hazard.

In order to improve the facilities, Fareham Town Football Club have been in

discussions with officers from Leisure and Planning for a number of years and

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-40-

discussed a number of proposals which would generate the funds required for the improvement of these facilities. The proposal would increase the Football Club’s enclosed area by 17 metres to the north and 8.5 metres to the east and within the boundaries of their new compound it is proposed to erect a driving test centre, motorcycle manoeuvring area and associated car parking.

In order to compensate for the loss of the open space, the Football Club

proposes to upgrade the community pitches so that they would be useable more often and also could provide two all weather pitches which the community can use.

Site Description

The application site is situated within Cams Alders Recreation Ground to the north of the access road towards Redlands Lane. Properties within St Michaels Grove and Highfield Avenue form the western boundary whilst Palmerston Business Park forms the eastern boundary.

Description of Proposal

It is proposed to upgrade the existing community football pitches, which would include new drainage systems, resurfacing, new watering system, floodlights and a pitch barrier;

Provision of two new all weather pitches available for community use but within the enclosed Fareham Town Football Club area;

Provision of new changing facilities ;

Erection of a single storey test centre, measuring 13.2 metres by 15.2 metres;

Additional parking would be provided in the form of 12 examiner car parking spaces and 18 customer parking spaces and eight motorcycle spaces;

Construction of a motorcycle manoeuvring area;

Enclosure of extended area with a 2.4 metre paladin fence. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG1; DG3; DG4; DG5; R2; R3 and T5. Relevant Planning History P/07/0542/FP – Erection of New Driving Test Centre, Car/Motorcycle Parking, Motorcycle Manoeuvring Area and Landscaping – This application was withdrawn as the proposal did not reflect the ongoing discussions with officers. Leisure in those discussions had seen the upgrading of the pitches as an integral part of the planning proposals to ensure significant community benefits occurred from them. Representations At the time of writing this report three letters has been received objecting on the following grounds:

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-41-

The proposal would result in a huge number of vehicles visiting the site which would add to the congestion of Newgate Lane and the Royal Mail sorting office;

Danger of collision with postmen;

The road to Cams Alders is unsuitable for additional traffic; this could be hazardous for children and footballers;

If this application is successful, lorries may use the car park again to practice their reversing techniques;

The resting of the transmitter mast could result in greater impact upon the Rainbow Centre;

a safety centre for youths on motorbikes to develop their skills and reduce accidents could be acceptable;

unacceptable increase in noise levels, air pollution and traffic;

increase in parking problems along Highfield Avenue which is already difficult on match days;

The phone mast has been interfering with television, moving this closer to residential properties would increase these problems.

One objection would be deleted provided the proposal would be subject to restrictions including hours of operation and adequately signposted to avoid additional traffic on residential roads.

Nine letters of support have been received raising the following issues:

the proposal would increase the security on the site which is desperately needed;

the upgrading and provision of new pitches would provide much needed leisure provision for the youth of Fareham;

improvements would be made without any cost to the tax payer or Fareham Borough Council;

the proposal would lead to the future of the football club being more successful;

proposal would lead to safer roads with fitter, happier youngsters keeping out of trouble;

obesity is a huge problem in this Country and the proposal would provide better exercise facilities and assist youngsters with improved social skills and may even produce an athlete for the 2012 Olympics;

the total project will only use 3% of the existing space at Cams Alder but result in huge improvements to the area;

motorcycle training facilities should be encouraged to try and reduce the injuries and damage caused to and by motorcyclists;

it may appear that the proximity of the excellent Rainbow Centre is inappropriate but it is considered important not to isolate such a centre from the community in which it exists.

The application has been publicised by site notices, the publicity period expires on the 7 June 2007; any letters subsequently received will be reported to members at the meeting. Consultations

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-42-

Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – in light of the current usage of Palmerston Drive it is considered that the increase in traffic generated by the driving centre is not objectionable. Due to the alignment of part of the section of road this will act as a traffic calming on speeds. No Highway objections Director of Regulatory Services (Environmental Health) – comments awaited Leisure and Community – comments awaited Environment Agency – comments awaited Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Arborist) – comments awaited Comments There are two elements to this application which would need to be carefully considered; the principle of the proposal including the benefits to the community that would accrue and the loss of the public open space, and the impact on the surrounding area from the proposed driving test centre. Principle of Development The existing pitches and facilities at Cams Alders are in desperate need of upgrading. The proposal would result in the loss of a small area of public open space, and the loss of an area within the Football Club’s existing enclosed area which would be used as a driving test centre. Policy R3 of the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review protects existing open space including public and private playing fields, allotments and informal open space unless a replacement site is provided which is equivalent in terms of accessibility, size and quality. However paragraph 8.32 states that redevelopment of a small part of the site may be acceptable to provide an appropriate recreation or community use which is important to the life of local people. Policy R2 which relates specifically to Cams Alders Sports Ground is supportive of proposals which improve the range and quality of outdoor and indoor sports provision here. The proposal would result in the loss of a small part of the open space at Cams Alders; but with secured finding (that will be secured by amending the lease agreement if planning permission is granted) the improvements to the area, (not only the upgrading of the pitches but the general improvements to the Football Clubs grounds itself) would have recreational benefits for the community which would outweigh the loss of the small area of open space. Concerns have been raised that if the test centre moved at a later date, the hardsurfacing and building would be left and other uses may utilise this area. Officers consider that it would be appropriate to address the matters by use of a condition of the use ceased.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-43-

Impact on Surrounding Area Following identification of Fareham as a critical search area, a site survey was undertaken to identify potential sites. Despite carrying out an extensive search it has only been possible to identify this suitable site. The provision of the multi-purpose driving test centre is a response to the need for Great Britain to comply with European Legislation coming into force in October 2008 intended to improve the standard of road safety for motorcycle and moped riders. This will require new riding and braking manoeuvres being carried out, and because of the safety implications it has been decided these should be done off the public road. It is therefore necessary to provide off-road facilities comprising a hard surfaced area and adjoining building with waiting facilities and office space.

The proposed test centre would provide accommodation for examiners consisting of office/room along with welfare facilities i.e. WC, shower, kitchenette together with a main waiting area for provisional drivers/riders, the proposed building is fairly low and designed to be in keeping with other buildings within Cams Alders and in addition there is a significant distance between the proposal building and neighbouring properties. With regard to the motorcycle test area, this would consist of an area of hardsurfacing to carry out a variety of manoeuvres, due to the slow speeds at which the test is carried out, the noise from the motorcycles is very low. Officers have consulted with the Council’s Environmental Health Officers at the pre-application discussion stage and will update members at the meeting upon receipt of their formal comments.

The new centre would operate both car and motorcycle testing and the average daily vehicles movements would be around 150 per day, which would be spread across the whole working day. Each motorcycle examiner can carry out between 6 and 8 tests per day whilst each car examiner can carry out between 7 and 10 tests per day; the maximum capacity would be 144 tests during the summer and 116 tests per day throughout the rest of the year. The majority of testing occurs between 08:30 and 16:30 principally on weekdays only, with a very small number of candidates tested outside the standard hours of operation. In light of the increase in traffic that would be using Palmerston Drive officers have consulted with the Council’s Highways Engineer. The Engineers consider that in light of the current usage of Palmerston Drive and due to the amount of vehicles parked around the area associated with the Post Office, all the parked vehicles would act as a traffic calming measure and as a result the proposal would not result in a danger and inconvenience to the highway.

It is considered by officers that significant benefits would be achieved from the proposal that would outweigh the loss of the small area of open space if the applicants entered into an agreement to secure the improvement of the recreational facility, and a condition for the removal of areas of hardstanding in the event of the test centre use ceasing.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-44-

RECOMMEND:

PERMISSION: Hours of use – Monday to Friday not outside 08:00-18:00; only to be used as a test centre and for no other purpose; when the use ceases the area should revert back to its original purpose; drainage; parking; landscaping; landscaping implementation. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0627/FP; P/07/0542/FP

(17) P/07/0541/FP FAREHAM WEST

MR W CHORLTON Agent: MR P GALLOWAY

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING 134 BLACKBROOK ROAD BUILDINGS AND ERECTION OF NEW FAREHAM SINGLE STOREY SCOUT AND COMMUNITY BUILDING OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description This application relates to a site to the south of Blackbrook Road between the junctions with Abbots Way and Barnwood Road. The site is currently occupied by two huts. One is primarily used by the Catisfield Scout Group and the other as a children’s day nursery. Both buildings are used for other community activities such as dance classes and dog training.

There is an informal parking area to the north of the buildings.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to demolish the existing buildings on site and erect a replacement community building in the south-eastern part of the site where the largest hut is currently located. The building would measure 30 metres in length, 18 metres in width with a maximum roof height of 3.9 metres. The building would have two main halls within it; one for the Scout Group and one for the children’s day nursery both of which would be used by other community groups when available. A car park would be provided at the north of the site for 10 vehicles. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG1, DG3, DG5 and T5.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-45-

Representations Two letters have been received raising the following concerns:

The car park should have adequate drainage;

The ground level and layout of the car park is a concern in terms of impact on neighbouring properties and visibility for drains and pedestrians;

The proposal should have an adequate amount of parking;

Double yellow lines should be imposed around the corners of Barnwood Road.

Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection. Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Arborist) – No objection subject to conditions. Director of Regulatory Services – No objection subject to conditions including the submission of a noise report detailing the worst case scenario of the use of the play area and the impact upon neighbouring properties and identifying any mitigation measures required. Comments The existing buildings on site are rather dated and in need of modernisation or replacement. The proposed building would be located in a similar position on the site to the existing scout hut which is towards the eastern side of the site. The building would be located 6 metres from the boundary with the residential properties to the east. The boundary fence and neighbouring properties are at a higher level than the ground level within the site therefore the proposed building would appear “lower” when viewed from the properties to the east. It is not considered that the building would have a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. The site is well screened by planting and trees; a number of which are subject to tree preservation orders. The Council’s Arborist has raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions to protect the trees during the construction works. The applicant has been asked to provide a schedule of the uses which occur at the site and this schedule would, it is suggested, form the basis of a condition to prevent other uses occurring unless otherwise first agreed with the Local Planning Authority. An update on the schedule will be provided at the committee meeting. A number of complaints have been received by Environmental Health in the past with regards to the noise made by children from the day nursery playing outside the smaller building of the north-west of the site. The existing play

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-46-

area used by the children’s day nursery is located closer to the boundary with neighbouring properties. The play area would be moved further away from the boundaries and would allow a level of acoustic screening. The applicant’s agent has said that the play area would only be used between 9am-1pm and Environmental Health have requested that this is subject to a condition. A noise report has also been requested as a condition to identify noise sources and levels and mitigation measures. The ground level of the car park could be addressed by condition. Officers are of the opinion that the proposal would provide a valuable up to date community facility which would not have any adverse impacts on the visual amenities of the streetscene or residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. The proposals have been subject of a proactive public consultation exercise, which gave residents and ward members an opportunity to see and comment on the scheme. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable. RECOMMEND:

PERMISSION: Children’s day nursery restricted to allocated outdoor play area, Outdoor play area to be used 9am-1pm, schedule of permitted uses, no amplified music after 10pm, boundary treatment, levels, parking, construction hours, no mud on road, no burning on site, Arboricultural impact assessment, Tree protection, Noise report BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0541/FP

(18) P/07/0645/TO/O FAREHAM WEST

MRS ANNE HEDGES Agent: A & T TREE CARE LTD

CROWN LIFT TO 3 METRES, CROWN 4A DALEWOOD ROAD CLEAN, REDUCE LATERAL SPREAD FAREHAM BY 1-2 METRES OAK TREE COVERED BY FTPO 565 OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to a detached property accessed off a private drive on the north side of Dalewood Road which is to the south of Blackbrook Road.

Description of Proposal Consent is sought to crown lift to 3 metres, crown clean and reduce lateral branch spread by 1-2 metres of an oak tree covered by FTPO 565

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-47-

Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policy: DG4. Relevant Planning History P/94/0931/TO Prune 16 Conifer Trees Covered by FTPO 181 Consent 13-10-1994. P/05/0509/TO Fell Leylandii Cypress covered by FTPO181 Consent 27-05-2005. Representations One letter has been received supporting the application on the following grounds:

It will lift the branches above head height on a public pathway and enable light through.

Consultations Chief Planning & Transportation Officer (Arborist) – Recommends consent Comments This proposal is to carry out works on an oak tree at 4a Dalewood Road which is positioned within the rear garden of the property and overhangs the public footpath between Dalewood Road and Anjou Crescent The council’s arborist has commented as follows:- ‘The proposed tree works will not be detrimental to the health, form and vigour of the oak and will have no adverse impact on public amenity’ Officers consider the proposal to be satisfactory and are of the view that the proposed tree works comply with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review since they would not be detrimental to the health of the tree or amenity of the area. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Works in accordance with BS 3998 (1989) BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0645/TO

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-48-

ZONE 3 – EASTERN WARDS Hill Head Portchester West Portchester East Stubbington

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-49-

(19) P/07/0532/FP HILL HEAD MR NEIL STAINROD Agent: MR M A COATES

PROVISION OF JULIET SWORDFISH CLOSE - FLATS 6 BALCONIES AND FRENCH DOORS TO & 7 - LEE ON SOLENT BEDROOMS ONLY OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to two first floor apartments which are located within a two storey block of apartments within the south-east corner of Swordfish Close which is to the south of Crofton Lane. Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for the provision of two first floor Juliet balconies which measure 1.5 metres in width, 0.55 metres in depth and at a height of 3 metres from the ground level. French doors would be provided behind the ballustrade. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Relevant Planning History P/07/0159/FP - (A) Alterations to Balustrades and Extension to the Existing Juliet Balconies (B) Provision of Rear Balcony – Split decision (Part A permitted and B refused). P/07/0531/FP - Replace Existing French Doors with Patio Doors – Permitted 23-05-2007. Representations Four letters of objections have been received objecting on the following grounds:

The proposed balconies would result in loss of privacy;

Partial loss of sun light to the occupiers of the ground floor flats;

Overlooking;

Due to the proposed nature of the construction of these balconies they could cause a noise nuisance directly above the ground floor bedrooms;

Detrimental effect on the look of continuity across the buildings;

These balconies will be highly visible from the beach and promenade.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-50-

Four letters of support have been received stating:

The Juliet balconies will enhance the external appearance of the apartment complex whilst matching the lounge balconies which have recently been given planning approval.

Comments This application has been submitted on behalf of two first floor apartments within a detached building containing six apartments at Swordfish Close. This proposal comprises a new Juliet balcony for each apartment. A previous application was submitted in February for the provision of two balconies measuring 1.1 metres in depth. The application was refused on the following grounds:- The proposed development would be contrary to Policies DG1 (A) and DG5 (B) of the Fareham Borough local Plan Review and is unacceptable in that the use of the proposed balcony area would result in an unacceptable level of noise and disturbance, loss of privacy and loss of sunlight to the occupiers of the ground floor apartments; detrimental to the level of residential amenities they could reasonably expect to enjoy. Officers have considered the concerns raised by local residents relating to loss of privacy, overlooking, loss of sun light and noise nuisance and are of the view that as the depth of the balconies has been reduced to 0.55 metres the balcony areas would not be used to such an extent that a noise disturbance would be created. With the reduction of the depth the structures would not cause a detrimental impact on the level of light or privacy to the neighbouring apartments. Concerns have also been raised that the balconies would have a detrimental impact on the design continuity across the building. Officers are of the view that as the building already has a number of similar balconies on this elevation the proposal would not be unacceptable in design and visual forms. Officers consider that the application complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0532/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-51-

(20) P/07/0635/FP HILL HEAD

KEVIN SMITH Agent: MR R B TUTTON

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING 22 CROFTON LANE DWELLING AND ERECTION OF HILL HEAD REPLACEMENT DWELLING AND DOUBLE GARAGE OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description

This application relates to a site to the east of Crofton Lane just to the south of the junction with Valsheba Drive. The site is currently occupied by a detached two storey property.

The site lies within the Hill Head Area of Special Residential Character.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to demolish the existing property and erect a replacement 4 bedroom dwelling with a detached garage on the frontage. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3, DG5, H2, H3 and T5. Relevant Planning History P/06/1617/FP Demolition of Existing House and Erection of Replacement

Dwelling with Link to 20 Crofton Lane Refused 1 February 2007. P/07/0344/FP Demolition of Existing House and Garage and Erection of

Replacement Detached Dwelling and Garage Refused 16 April 2007. Representations The neighbour notification period expires on 7 June 2007. At the time of writing this report no letters had been received. Any letters subsequently received will be reported at the committee meeting. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Director of Regulatory Services – Comments awaited Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Arborist) – No objection subject to conditions

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-52-

Comments The existing dwelling is of no significant architectural merit and therefore the principle of its demolition is considered acceptable subject to a proposal coming forward of a satisfactory nature. The area is characterised by detached dwellings set within large spacious plots. Officers consider that the proposal would not be out of character with the surrounding area. There have been two refusals at this site in the last six months. The first application involved demolishing the existing dwelling and erecting a replacement dwelling with a link to No 20. It was considered that this would have resulted in the creation of one large building reducing the space about the building to the detriment of the visual amenities and character of the area. The second application was for the demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of a replacement dwelling. The only reason for refusal of this application was that the replacement dwelling would have been set further back into the site than the existing dwelling and consequently would have resulted in loss of light to a kitchen window within the side elevation of the neighbouring property to the north. The current application is similar to the last application except the replacement dwelling would be in a similar position to the existing dwelling and would therefore not be built in front of the neighbour’s window. It is therefore considered that the previous reason for refusal has been overcome. The neighbouring properties to the north and south both have detached garage on the frontage. It is not considered that the garage would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the streetscene. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable. RECOMMEND: Subject to Comments of the Director of Regulatory Services (Environmental Health)

PERMISSION: Materials to be Submitted, Boundary Treatment, Parking, Levels, Obscure Glaze and Fix Shut to 1.7m first floor window (north), Remove PD first floor (north & south), no mud on road, hours of construction, no burning, Tree Protection BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0635/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-53-

(21) P/07/0643/FP HILL HEAD

MR & MRS A J GROTH

RETENTION OF FRONT/SIDE 79 SHANNON ROAD BOUNDARY FENCE IN EXCESS OF STUBBINGTON ONE METRE ADJACENT TO HIGHWAY OFFICERS REPORT - Simon Thompson Ext 4815

Site Description

This application relates to a detached house situated on the western side of Shannon Road, Stubbington, between the junctions of this road with both Forties Close and Finisterre Close.

Description of Proposal Retention of a 1.5 metre high boundary fence, with a further 0.3 metre trellis on top throughout, located at the front and north western side of the residential curtilage of 79 Shannon Road, Stubbington. This has been erected to replace a fast growing Leylandii hedge which had grown in excess of 8 foot in height and encroaching on the pavement. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3, DG5 and T5. Representations One letter and two emails have been received objecting on the following grounds:

The fence is against regulations as it is over one metre high and next to a public footpath;

It is too high and against the ruling that this estate should have no fences at the front of the properties, as per deeds and the terms of contract with the developers;

It does not fit in with the street scene and is out of keeping with the area;

The fence is nearly 2 metres high and is the only such feature in the neighbourhood, and would set a dangerous precedent in this open plan estate;

The fence is secured to a neighbours garage apparently without owner permission and it should be removed and damage made good.

One letter has been received raising no objections and explaining that this fence constitutes an improvement to what it replaced:

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-54-

The fence is a better alternative than the former fast growing 8 foot hedge as it allows a neighbouring property greater visibility of the road and increased light into their living room;

To replace the fence with one of one metre in height would reduce the security of the property as well as for the neighbour to the south east.

Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) - No objection Comments Condition 4 of the original planning permission for 79 Shannon Road specifies that: “Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1977/81, no building, structure or anything else including walls and fences shall be placed or constructed in front of the front wall of any dwelling, or the flank wall of a dwelling at the junction of two roads and/or footpaths, without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.” The reason cited for this condition is to secure the retention of a satisfactory appearance to the development. The fence measures over 1 metre in height adjacent to a highway. In light of the foregoing the fence requires planning permission. The general nature of the development that 79 Shannon Road forms a part of has open plan front gardens. There are occasions though where there is two metre high or so hedging to the front of properties, and it should be noted that there was such a hedge formerly at 79 Shannon Road. That said, such hedging does not need planning permission and is a more sympathetic feature than the fence the subject of this application. There are examples of 1.8 to 2 metre high walling/fencing in the street scene nearby but these tend to be original features of the estate and are typically to the side and rear of residential properties, not to the front. The fencing proposed to be retained is an abrupt unsympathetic visual feature hard up against the pavement. This development was designed to be open plan, and a condition imposed seeking to retain that character, and the retention of this fence would conflict, in officers opinion, with this intention. In conclusion, it is considered to be unacceptable, for example in street scene and local character terms, is of a poor standard of design, and contrary to Policy DG3 (A) and (B), and of Policy DG5 (A) of the Local Plan Review. RECOMMEND:

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-55-

REFUSE: Contrary to Policies DG3 (A) and (B) and Policy DG5 (A) of the Local Plan Review: detracts from street scene and building line, out of character with the surrounding area and not of a high standard of design. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0643/FP and FBC.7552/4

(22) P/07/0515/FP/O PORTCHESTER EAST

MR MARTIN READ Agent: MR ANTHONY GLADMAN

CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DORMER 10 CARLTON ROAD WINDOWS, ROOF ALTERATIONS AND PORTCHESTER DETACHED GARAGE OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to a semi-detached dwelling on the north side of Carlton Road which is to the south of Anson Grove.

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for:- i) The increase in height of the gable end beneath the existing barn hip by

0.5 metres. ii) The provision of an additional front and rear dormer measuring 2

metres in width, 1.5 metres in depth and overall height of 2.5 metres to the ridge.

iii) Detached pitch roof garage which measures 5.5 metres in depth, 3.2 metres in width with an eaves height of 2.1 metres and a ridge height of 3.4 metres.

Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Relevant Planning History FBC.6948/1 Erection of Rear Conservatory - Permission 02-09-1986. Representations No letters of representation have been received on this application. Comments This application relates to a semi-detached dwelling which has a barn hip style roof with one hipped roof dormer on both the front and rear roof slopes. This

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-56-

proposal is for the increase of the gable end of the barn-hip by 0.5 metres, the provision of an additional dormer window on both the front and rear roof slopes and a replacement detached garage. The character of the area is of chalet style bungalows with various different dormer types and roof designs. Officers consider none of the three elements of the proposals would create a detrimental impact on the neighbouring properties or the character of the area. The proposals comply with the Fareham Borough local Plan Review and the approved Extension Design Guide. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match, use of garage incidental to dwelling. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0515/FP

(23) P/07/0526/FP PORTCHESTER EAST As amended by plans received 22nd May 2007

MR & MRS A EARL Agent: MARTIN CRITCHLEY CONSULTANTS

ERECTION OF FIRST FLOOR SIDE 20 SISSINGHURST ROAD EXTENSION PORTCHESTER OFFICERS REPORT - Simon Thompson Ext 4815

Site Description

The application site relates to a detached house with side attached garage situated on the western side of Sissinghurst Road, Portchester, approximately 30 metres to the south of its junction with Tattershall Crescent. The property is set back 1.7 metres beyond its neighbours to the north.

Description of Proposal This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a first floor extension over an existing garage and utility room on the northern side of 20 Sissinghurst Road. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Relevant Planning History P/07/0165/FP – Erection of first floor side extension – Refused March 2007. Representations

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-57-

Representations have been received from the immediate neighbour to the north objecting on the following grounds:

The existing and proposed floor plans are virtually identical to the previous application and the bathroom and bedroom remain unchanged;

The only apparent revision is the slight reduction in roof height and a marginal offset from the front wall;

The proposed extension will still impact of No 18 Sissinghurst Road, particularly the side and rear;

Concerns over loss of light, outlook aspect and privacy;

The reason for refusal of the previous application has not been resolved;

The space around and between the buildings remain unchanged;

Similar extensions in the area are separated by two side paths whereas this one has only one 0.87 metre wide side path;

The development is also contrary to policy, including the Council’s Extension Design Guide which looks for one metre off the boundary for two storey side extensions;

There appears to be inconsistencies in decisions of the Council on extensions, for example at 31 Sissinghurst Road;

The rear portion of the extension should be moved off the boundary and the bathroom moved to the rear with an obscure glazed window to prevent overlooking of the neighbour’s to the north rear garden.

Comments Planning application P/07/0165/FP put forward a similar first floor side extension at 20 Sissinghurst Road. This earlier application was refused because it was contrary to Policies DG3(A)(B) and DG5(A) of the Local Plan Review and the Council’s Approved Extension Design Guide. It was held to be unacceptable in that by virtue of its height, width, bulk, design (particularly lack of subservience) and proximity to the northern boundary, the proposed extension would: (i) unacceptably reduce the space about the building to the detriment of

the spatial character and visual amenities of the street scene; and (ii) result in an unsympathetic addition to this dwelling, detrimental to the

appearance of the dwelling, detrimental to the appearance of the dwelling and visual amenities of the street scene.

The current application seeks to address these concerns by lowering the height of the roof and eaves of the extension and to introduce a half dormer in this roof so making the extension subservient. These changes and the extension’s retained barn hip and reduced front projection help to reduce the extensions height, bulk and dominance on the boundary and particularly in the context of its street scene impact. In light of the concerns raised by the neighbours the applicants have been approached to consider whether the extension could be reduced or off set at

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-58-

the rear. Although they have declined to undertake such a amendment, they have provided amended plans that show their proposed bathroom relocated from the front of the extension to its rear, so presenting the opportunity to obscure glaze the extension’s proposed first floor rear window, removing the opportunity for oblique views into the neighbour’s rear garden. It should be remembered that the original application was not refused because of a perception of an overbearing relationship at the rear of the extension towards the neighbour to the north, or its impact on light, outlook and privacy for that neighbour. Beyond the neighbour’s side alley to the north is their own garage and at its rear a utility room, then a kitchen window at the rear further north. In light of the distance between the neighbours windows and the proposed extension and the limited set back, Officers do not consider the proposal would materially harm the amenities of the occupies of that property. The proposed first floor extension would be built up upon the walls of the existing single storey garage and utility room. As amended, the proposal would not create a cramped or terraced appearance within the street .

RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match; obscure glaze and fixed shut to 1.7 metres above internal floor level first floor rear window; no opening north elevations. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0526/FP and P/07/0165/FP

(24) P/07/0538/FP PORTCHESTER EAST

RAVENSWOOD DEVELOPMENT LTD Agent: P.L.C. ARCHITECTS

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING WHITE HART LANE 52-54/ 3 BUNGALOWS & ERECTION OF 7 NEVILLE AVENUE - TOWN HOUSES & 2 BUNGALOWS, PORTCHESTER BIN/CYCLE STORAGE & PARKING OFFICERS REPORT - Tony Boswell Ext 2526

Introduction This application would ordinarily be refused by officers under delegated powers, but has been placed before the Committee in view of the letter of support received. Site Description

The application site lies to the south east of the junction of White Hart Lane and Neville Avenue. The frontage to White Hart Lane is adjacent to the first of four shops at 50 White Heart Lane. The frontage to Neville Avenue terminates adjacent to the first semi-detached house at 5 Neville Avenue. The rear of the site extends considerably into an area behind 5, 7 and 9 Neville Avenue; 6, 8

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-59-

and 10 Olive Crescent, and 22 Edgar Crescent. Much of the site at 52 White Heart Lane has historically been used as part of the former retail use of the premises.

Description of Proposal The proposal would involve clearance of the site and the erection of seven semi-detached houses (with three in a terrace) on the frontage to White Hart Lane. Each of these would be of two storeys, with flush skylights in the roof to light a 2nd floor bedroom. Vehicular access would from a new road to be constructed on the return frontage, adjacent to 5 Neville Avenue. At the rear of the site, behind properties in Olive Crescent, there would be two x 2 bedroom bungalows. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: H2, DG3, DG5, T5 and R5. Relevant Planning History None relevant Representations Twelve letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:

Disruption during build period;

Loss of value to adjoining properties;

Potential overlooking, and loss of tree screening;

Inadequate parking provision, and increasing local traffic;

Concern about future boundaries and fencing ;

Bungalows should not be allowed to extend into roof which might allow overlooking.

A letter of support has been received, commenting that the proposal would improve the area. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – recommend refusal, inadequate parking, and inadequate visibility at junction. Director of Regulatory Services (EHO) – No objections Director of Regulatory Services (Pollution and Housing) – requesting a condition requiring a desk top study of potential for site contamination if permitted Comments

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-60-

The principle of redeveloping this site is very supportable, and the proposed seven houses to the White Hart Lane frontage would be an acceptable and significant benefit to the existing street scene. The key issues in this case are those identified by the CP&TO above, and the implications of providing an improved parking provision and means of access from Neville Avenue. The site used for retail purposes includes a number of trees, particularly towards the southern end, behind Olive Crescent and Edgar Crescent. The proposed two bungalows would occupy much of that area and, were it intended to permit this proposal, a tree survey would be requested to evaluate their quality and significance. RECOMMEND: REFUSE: Contrary to policy, inadequate parking provision, forward visibility and means of access, absence of contribution towards improvement of local open space and recreational facilities, absence of tree survey. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0538/FP

(25) P/07/0638/AD/M PORTCHESTER EAST TRUSTEES OF PORTCHESTER PARISH HALL

DISPLAY OF INTERNALLY CASTLE STREET - ILLUMINATED BOX SIGN PORTCHESTER PARISH HALL - PORTCHESTER OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates the Portchester Parish Hall which is located on the west side of Castle Street Portchester.

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for the display of an internally illuminated box sign above the main entrance to the building. Policies Fareham Borough local Plan Review Policy: DG7. Relevant Planning History P/00/1060/OA Erection of single storey community hall - Outline Permission -05-09-2000.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-61-

P/00/1447/FP Erection of single storey community hall – Permission 22-12-2000. Representations No letters of representation have been received as a result of publicising the application. Consultations Chief Planning & Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection Comments Advertisement Consent is sought for the display of an internally illuminated box sign which would be positioned above the main entrance of the parish hall. The sign would be recessed underneath an existing canopy which would partly screen the sign from certain angles. Officers consider that the proposed sign is acceptable and would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the building or area. The application complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan review. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Illumination shall not exceed 1600cd/m² BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0638/AD

(26) P/07/0528/FP PORTCHESTER WEST

MR STEVE UPSTELL Agent: EDWARD CAUSH & ASSOCIATES

ERECTION OF SINGLE/TWO STOREY 4 CAMS HILL REAR EXTENSION FAREHAM OFFICERS REPORT - Emma Betteridge Ext 2677

Site Description

This application relates to a mid-terrace property on the north side of Wallington Shore Road which is to the south of Charlemont Drive. It currently has a single storey rear extension accommodating a bathroom and conservatory.

Description of Proposal Planning permission is sought for a first floor flat roof rear extension which measures 2.5 metres in width, 2 metres in depth with a height of 6 metres

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-62-

above a single storey flat roof rear extension which measures 4.2 metres in width, 3 metres in depth and some metres 3.4 high. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Relevant Planning History FBC.6823/1 Erection of Single Storey Rear Extension – Permission 19-01-1987. Representations One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:

Loss of light to two skylights on the roof of a single storey extension at the rear of the house which provides sunlight to the main living area of the house;

It would make it difficult to sell the neighbouring property. Comments The proposal is for a full width single storey rear with a first floor extension above just over half the width of the property, at the eastern side of it. The neighbouring property to the east has an existing single storey rear extension which contains two roof lights, one that serves a kitchen area and the other serves a bathroom. Concern has been raised about impact upon the two roof lights and the reduction in light that the extension would cause on the kitchen, bathroom and the secondary light that is provided to the front room from these roof lights. Officers have considered the concerns raised but since these two rooms also have windows within the rear elevation which provides light to the them, then proposed extension would not have a significantly detrimental impact on the amenities available to the occupiers of the neighbouring property. Any difficulty in selling the neighbouring property is not a material planning consideration which cannot be considered whilst determining this application. Officers consider the application to be acceptable since it complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match, withdraw Pd rights east and west elevation BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0528/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-63-

(27) P/07/0616/FP PORTCHESTER WEST

RYJACK HOMES LTD Agent: AXIS ARCHITECTURE LTD

ERECTION OF EXTENSION TO CAMS HILL SCHOOL PROVIDE NEW MAIN ENTRANCE, SHEARWATER AVENUE EVENTS HALL, LIBRARY AND DRAMA FAREHAM STUDIO AND ADDITIONAL PARKING OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description This application relates to Cams Hill School which is located on the corner of Shearwater Avenue and Cams Hill.

The site is an educational establishment within the countryside;

It is also within a local gap to which a specific Policy (FS3) refers in the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to;

Erect a two storey extension to incorporate a new reception area, events hall and a drama studio at ground floor level and a library at first floor level;

Provide additional parking for 36 vehicles. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: FS3, C1, C3, C11, DG3 and DG5. Representations The neighbour notification period expires 6 June 2007. At the time of writing this report no comments had been received. Any comments subsequently received will be reported at the committee meeting. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – No objection subject to the access drive being 6 metres in width throughout. Director of Regulatory Services – Comments awaited Comments

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-64-

The proposed extension and car park would be located well within both the boundaries of the site and the existing group of buildings. It is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of the dwellings to the east of Shearwater Avenue. The nearest residential property is a minimum of 80 metres from the proposed extension and car park. It is not considered that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the visual amenities of the streetscene, nor would it physically and/or visually diminish the local gap between Fareham and Portchester. Officers consider that the proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is acceptable.

RECOMMEND: Subject to the receipt of an amended plan showing a 6 metre wide access drive and the comments of the Director of Regulatory Services (Environmental Health) PERMISSION: Brick and render to match existing, archaeology, construction hours, mud on road, no burning, parking, access details, surfacing materials. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0616/FP

(28) P/07/0474/FP STUBBINGTON

MR & MRS S P WALLIS

ERECTION OF TWO STOREY FRONT 38 TAWNY OWL CLOSE AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE STUBBINGTON EXTENSIONS OFFICERS REPORT - Susannah Chaplin Ext 2412

Site Description This application relates to a detached dwelling at the southern end of Tawny Owl Close.

Description of Proposal Permission is sought to erect;

A two storey front extension measuring 3.4 metres in depth, 4 metres in width with a ridge height of 6.7 metres;

A single storey side extension measuring 1.3 metres in width, 3.8 metres in depth with a ridge height of 3.6 metres.

Policies

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-65-

Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: DG3 and DG5. Representations One letter has been received objecting on the following grounds:

The proposal is out of character with the surrounding properties;

The proposal would set a precedent for the extension of other properties in a similar manner;

The extension would bring the property closer to the front facing windows of the neighbouring property;

Loss of privacy;

Loss of property value.

Comments The objector’s property is at right angles to the application property. The objector’s property faces east and the application property faces north. At present the objector has a clear unobstructed outlook to the east. Officers do not consider that the proposal would alter this outlook to the detriment of the residential amenities of the objector’s property, having regard for the alignment of the latter property, and the distance from the proposed extension. Tawny Owl Close is a comprehensive residential development permitted in 1992. There are several different standard housing types. Although the property would therefore be different to the other properties on the close it is not considered that the proposed extension would be an unsympathetic addition to the property. The extension windows would not directly face the objector’s property therefore it is not considered that the proposal would result in loss of privacy. Officers are of the opinion that the single storey side extension would not have any detrimental impact on the neighbouring properties or visual amenities of the streetscene. Loss of property value is not a material planning consideration. The proposal complies with the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review and is considered acceptable. RECOMMEND: PERMISSION: Materials to match, Withdraw Permitted development rights for the first floor (west elevation) BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0474/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-66-

(29) P/07/0552/FP STUBBINGTON

NEW STAR ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD Agent: ROBERT TURLEY ASSOCIATES

ERECTION OF RESTAURANT (CLASS NEWGATE LANE - FOCUS DIY A3) ON SURPLUS CAR PARK SITE - FAREHAM OFFICERS REPORT – Tony Boswell Ext 2526

Site Description

The site is on the Newgate Lane frontage of the existing “Focus” DIY store.

Description of Proposal The proposed building is single storey under a barrel roof, with a floor area of 300 sq metres, providing 130 covers – with potential for take away sales. Although the application is for use class A3, the intention is that it would trade as a “Pizza Hut”. The existing car park provides 192 car spaces and in general appears to be underused. As reconfigured to accommodate the proposed restaurant, as well as the existing store some 158 car spaces would be provided. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review policies: DG3, DG5, T5 and S12. Relevant Planning History P/06/0285/FP – A3 Restaurant (as now) – refused 27th April 2006. Representations One e-mailed letter has been received in support of the application. Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – As with the previous application, reflecting the nature of the use and the potential for local sales, a cycleway should be provided along the Newgate Lane frontage to the existing Tukes Avenue footpath/cycleway. Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Policy) – Object and recommend refusal due to strong reservations regarding the applicant’s sequential test. (These issues are discussed below). Director of Regulatory Services – no objections Southern Water – no objections.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-67-

Comments The appearance of the building and its impact upon the nature of the surroundings appear to be acceptable. In view of its isolated location there does not appear to be any potential for adverse neighbourly effects of any kind. From officer observations and the applicant’s submissions, there is clearly capacity within the car park to allow the proposed building to trade alongside the retained Focus store. Furthermore no exception was taken to this aspect in the course of refusing the previous application. The key issue in this case appears to be, as before, the need for the applicant to demonstrate compliance with policy S12 of the Fareham Borough Local Plan Review. This states:

“Proposals for shops for the sale of hot food (Class A3) will be permitted provided that either by themselves or cumulatively they would not … damage the vitality and viability of the centre or area contrary to Policies S3 and S7 …”

Since the 2006 refusal of permission, the applicants have undertaken a significant amount of work in addressing the “sequential test”, to demonstrate that there are no alternative sites available for such a restaurant within Fareham Town Centre – where it might reinforce rather than erode the “vitality and viability” of the centre. In the view of officers that work has been to some extent hampered by the applicant’s rather inflexible attitude to the size and scale of restaurant premises which the have evaluated. They appear to be very committed to the size actually proposed on this site, without regard to alternative formats which might be more appropriate in alternative locations, or in a town centre or yet more appropriate trading context. Government advice on proper operation of the sequential test emphasises the need for flexibility on the part of applicants, both in terms of size, time frame and availability of alternatives.

The proposed building is clearly of a design and format to which the applicants are committed with potential to trade as a “stand alone” location (through specific customer visits, including take away sales), rather than as a simple ancillary to the retail units of Newgate Lane.

Officers are not convinced by the applicant’s approach to the sequential test – which has a number of evident flaws. As was the case with P/06/0285/FP, the application should be refused in accordance with Policy S12 as the proposed would not promote or enhance the vitality and viability of the existing Town Centre or other District Centres.

RECOMMEND: REFUSE: Contrary to Policy S12, would not promote or enhance the vitality and viability of Fareham Town Centre or other Centres. Further Information

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-68-

Had the council been minded to grant planning permission then a cycleway link along the Newgate Lane frontage from the existing cycleway to the south would have been required. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0552/FP, P/06/0285/FP

(30) P/07/0564/FP STUBBINGTON

MR T P DOHERTY

ERECTION OF DETACHED CHALET 105 BURNT HOUSE LANE BUNGALOW - LAND ADJACENT TO - STUBBINGTON OFFICERS REPORT - Tony Boswell Ext 2526

Site Description

The site is a side garden to number 105 Burnt House Lane, and lies at the apex formed by the junction of Burnt House Lane and Stroud Green Lane. Outline planning permission for a dwelling was granted on appeal in 2005.

Description of Proposal This is a full application and seeks permission for a two bedroomed chalet bungalow, with a multi-hipped roof some 7.1 metres high. Two off-street parking spaces would be provided accessed from the frontage to Burnt House Lane. Policies Fareham Borough Local Plan Review Policies: H2, DG3, DG5, R5 and T5. Relevant Planning History P/05/0412/OA – Chalet bungalow – allowed on appeal. Representations Two letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:

Proposed chalet is too tall;

The Inspector in allowing the appeal did not allow first floor windows;

Levels should be controlled by condition;

Existing hedges should be retained;

PD rights should be removed in view of the small size of plot;

Will overlook adjoining properties;

Surface water drainage is poor within the area, and SW should be to a soakaway.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-69-

Consultations Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Highways) – no objections Director of Regulatory Services – no objections. Comments The principle of a detached chalet dwelling on this site was established by the 2005 appeal decision, which was in outline only. The proposed dwelling now applied for is larger than that indicated by the appeal drawings in that a conservatory is shown at the western end of the property. The appeal proposals indicated a very small area of private garden area. That remains the case with the current proposals, although the entire garden area is enclosed by hedges. The issues in this case are therefore the acceptability of the proposed design within the street scene, and issues of potential overlooking from first floor windows. The building illustrated has a tall hipped roof, with dormer windows to its north and south sides. Other first floor windows would face the existing dwelling at 105 Burnt House Lane, but at such close proximity that no potential for loss of privacy would arise. In context the proposed building would be similar in scale and character to many of its near neighbours, particularly the adjoining chalet at 88 Mays Lane, which has a tall roof of similar overall height. The north facing dormer looking towards 88 Mays Lane would contain an en-suite bathroom and can be conditioned to be fixed shut and obscure glazed. The two major windows to the south side at first floor level would serve bedrooms. These would face the front gardens of 100, 102/104 and 106 at a distance of between 23 and 28 metres from the front main wall of each dwelling concerned. The proposal for a dwelling here was originally resisted by the Council due to its effect upon the street scene and its limited site area. However, that view was not supported by the Inspector at appeal. The detailed proposals as now submitted would not, in officers opinion lead to additional harm beyond the permitted scheme. It is considered that relevant issued can be addressed by the imposition of appropriate planning conditions, though it is necessary to seek clearer floor plans including confirmation of location of windows before any permission is granted. RECOMMEND: Subject to the receipt of fully detailed floor layout plans: PERMISSION: external materials, levels, windows on N side to be fixed shut and obscure glazed, removal of PD rights (further windows, outbuildings and

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-70-

enlargements), hedges to be retained, hours of construction, construction yard and traffic, no mud on roads. BACKGROUND PAPERS: File P/07/0564/FP

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-71-

PLANNING APPEALS

The following list details the current situation regarding new and outstanding planning appeals and decisions.

APPEALS LODGED 1. P/06/1254/FP

Appellant: Mr & Mrs Hodgson Site: 42 Fareham Park Road, Fareham Decision Maker: Planning Development Control Committee Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 24th April 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of two semi-detached chalet bungalows..

2. P/07/0047/FP

Appellant: Mr J Medlow Site: 3 Culloden Close, Fareham Decision Maker: Planning Development Control Committee Recommendation: Permission

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 14th May 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the erection of detached bungalow and garage, and erection of replacement garage for no.3.

3. P/07/0057/CU

Appellant: John Willment Marine Ltd Site: Universal Marina, Crableck Lane, Sarisbury Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 24th May 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the continued use of the land as trailer and dinghy park (open storage).

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-72-

4. P/06/1376/FP

Appellant: Bank Machine Ltd Site: 1 Holly Grove Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 30th May 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the installation of automatic teller machine. 5. P/07/0025/FP

Appellant: Mr M Riddell Site: 3 Peak Lane Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 31st May 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of five dwellings.

6. P/06/1647/FP

Appellant: Lidl UK Properties Site: Lidl UK Properties GmbH Decision Maker: Planning Development Control Committee Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 1st June 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the erection of foodstore with associated parking and first floor offices with parking.

PUBLIC INQUIRY/HEARING DATES 7. P/06/1588/FP

Appellant: Taylor Woodrow Dev. Ltd Site: Shetland Rise Whiteley – land off - Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers

Recommendation: Refusal Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 23rd April 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the erection of 47 dwellings, new access road, associated car parking and landscaping.

Date of Inquiry: 4th & 5th September 2007

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-73-

DECISIONS 8. P/06/0421/FP

Appellant: Mr G Randall Site: 43 Brook Lane, Warsash – Land adjacent to - Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers

Recommendation: Refusal Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 17th October 2006 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the erection of a detached dwelling. Decision: Allowed Inspector’s Reason: The Inspector considered that the area was not rural as

the mix of housing to the eastern side and towards the northern part of Brook Lane is not sporadic or scattered development. He states that the immediate locality cannot be described as an isolated group of dwellings in the countryside. He found the proposed development an acceptable frontage infill and he did not feel that it would set a precedent for other schemes in the area as each proposal would be assessed purely on its own particular merits.

Date of Decision: 14th May 2007 9. P/06/0818/FP

Appellant: Mr & Mrs S A Pontefract Site: Cedarlea, Occupation Lane, Titchfield, Fareham Decision Maker: Officer’s Delegated Powers

Recommendation: Refusal Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 16th November 2006

Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to refuse planning permission for the erection of a two storey side extension.

Decision: Allowed Inspector’s Reason: The Inspector considered that the appeal proposal width

was only slightly wider than that that had already been permitted. Taking this into account he stated that the appeal extension would be unlikely to have any significantly greater effect on the character and appearance of the house, or the street scene, than what could already be built. He also concluded that the proposal would not discordant with the character of the surrounding area or have an unduly harmful effect on the Meon Strategic Gap.

Date of Decision: 14 th May 2007 10. P/06/0279/FP

Appellant: Mrs V Young Site: 24 Vixen Close, Stubbington Decision Maker: Planning Development Control Committee

Recommendation: Permission Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 11th December 2006

Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to refuse planning permission for the erection of single storey/two storey side/rear extension.

Decision: Dismissed Date of Decision: 16th May 2007

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-74-

11. P/06/1074/AD

Appellant: Mrs C C G Chavasse Site: 63 Southampton Road, Park Gate Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 16TH March 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse consent for the display of a non-illuminated flagpole. Decision: Dismissed Date of Decision: 16th May 2007 12. P/06/1344/FP

Appellant: Harkstore Ltd Site: The Hampshire Rose, 96 Highlands Road, Fareham

Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 15th December 2006 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse permission for the demolition of existing public house and erection of 12no. flats in 2 blocks with access, car parking and landscaping.

Decision: Dismissed Date of Decision: 17th May 2007 13. P/06/0628/FP

Appellants: Bank Machine Ltd Ltd Site: 152 Hunts Pond Road, Titchfield Common Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 2nd February 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the installation of an automated teller machine to front elevation.

Decision: Allowed Inspector’s Reason: The Inspector did agree that the ATM could cause a

disturbance to residential properties with people using the facility, by way of car doors slamming or engines running, during the night and early hours of the morning. However he concluded that a condition stating that the ATM could only be used between the times of 0600 to 2200 and when not in use the ATM is to be secured by a mechanical shutter would prevent undue disturbance.

Date of Decision: 21st May 2007

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-75-

14. P/06/0792/FP

Appellant: Mr Wayne Corps Site: 31 Merryfield, Titchfield Common Decision Maker: Planning Development Control Committee Recommendation: Permission

Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 12th February 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the erection of a two storey dwelling. Decision: Allowed Inspector’s Reason: The Inspector considered that the new house would not

appear unduly bulky or out of keeping next to the terraced houses. He was satisfied with the parking provision and stated that it accorded with the relevant County Council standards.

In his conclusion he stated that the proposal would not harm the area’s character and appearance.

Date of Decision: 21st May 2007 15. P/06/1212/OA

Appellant: Mr A D Taylor & Mr P Chapel Site: Hazelnut Cottage, Whiteley Lane, Burridge Land adj. to

Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers Recommendation: Refusal Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 19th January 2007 Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to

refuse planning permission for the erection of a detached dwelling (outline application).

Decision: Dismissed Date of Decision: 25th May 2007 16. P/06/0908/FP

Appellant: Mr & Mrs R Ellis Site: 10 Cliff Road Hill Head Decision Maker: Officers’ Delegated Powers

Recommendation: Refusal Council’s Decision: Refused Date Lodged: 14th December 2006

Reason for Appeal: Against the decision of the Local Planning Authority to refuse planning permission for alterations to roof to accommodate room in roof and provision of front balcony and dormers.

Decision: Dismissed Date of Decision: 25th May 2007 Enquiries: For further information on this report please contact Lee Smith (Ext 2427).

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-76-

ZONE 1 – 2:30

2 9 P/07/0471/CU – 266 BROOK LANE, SARISBURY GREEN Satisfactory parking layout received

4 13 P/07/0545/OA – 379 HUNTS POND ROAD, TITCHFIELD COMMON

Satisfactory plan received demonstrating capacity to reverse a

vehicle out of the garage and turn on site. The second sentence of the penultimate paragraph should read

‘The details of disposing’ rather than ‘displaying’. ZONE 2 – 3:00

7 24 P/07/0395/VC – MOBILE CATERING VAN, STATION APPROACH

Third paragraph of second page should read ‘directly relating’ rather

than ‘directly relocated’. Fourth paragraph should read ‘adjourned to establish’ rather than ‘adjoined to establishment’ and ‘causal relationship’ rather than ‘coastal relationship.’ Fifth paragraph should read ‘that suggestion’ rather than ‘their suggestion’. The police have not been able to provide evidence of a causal relationship between the crimes that have occurred and the mobile catering van. They have stated that historically they have received numerous complaints from residents of Western Court, West Street which are the nearest dwellings to the site. The complaints have involved noise from people shouting and cars revving engines whilst congregating around the mobile catering van. The police consider that this highlights that even without Prague Junction the mobile catering van is a source of crime and disorder. Commenting on officer’s suggestion to permit the application for a temporary period until May 2008 it was not considered that this would resolve the problem and the police were of the opinion that they would be neglecting their duty to reduce crime and disorder and anti-social behaviour in agreeing to this suggestion. The police have suggested that restricting the opening hours of the van to 06:00-23:00 would overcome their objection.

Officers are of the opinion that in light of the lack of evidence which

directly links the crimes that have occurred to the mobile catering van it would be unreasonable to refuse this application. The refusal

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-77-

of this application would result in the displacement of the catering van and it is considered that there are few locations within the Borough which would be as suitable for such a use. It is therefore recommended that permission is granted for a temporary period expiring 31 May 2008 which will allow the ongoing monitoring of the situation.

8 27 P/07/0630/FP – 4 CHAUCER CLOSE, Fareham Borough Council

Amended plans have been received reducing the depth of the two storey side/rear extension. As a result of the amendment the objection received by the neighbouring property has been withdrawn.

9 28 P/07/0455/CU – NORTH WEST COMMUNITY CENTRE, HENRY

COURT DRIVE Chief Planning and Transportation Officer (Policy) –

Policy R3 protects the loss of open space including public and private playing fields, allotments and informal open space, unless a replacement site is provided which is equivalent in terms of accessibility, size and quality. However paragraph 8.32 does state that ‘Redevelopment of a small part of a site may be acceptable to provide an appropriate recreation or community use which is important to the life of local people.’ However the overall impact will be the loss of public open space to provide private access for the nursery school where there is easily accessible open space to the south (school playing fields) and north of the site including an equipped play area. There is concern that permitting this application may set a precedent which may result in the gradual, piecemeal loss of public amenity space. It may be helpful to draw attention to the Open Space Supplementary Planning Guidance (adopted March 2002 and modified April 2007). Appendix 6 indicates a deficit in both children’s equipped and informal play space in this area. Furthermore, the draft Greenspace Study (soon to be published) although not supplementary planning guidance, also demonstrates that the area has a shortage of both parks/ amenity open space and of equipped children’s play facilities. In the context of the shortages identified in these two documents, the implications of transferring further public open space over to a private use needs particular careful consideration. It is also noteworthy that the Draft Greenspace Study does recommend quality improvements to the adjacent children’s play area, including self closing gates and new equipment for a wide range of ages as a high priority at Fareham Park. Therefore future improved provision is highly recommended and the potential for the nursery to make use of these existing facilities may be increased

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-78-

still further. It is difficult to arrive at a firm conclusion regarding this application. Supplementary Planning Guidance and evidence suggest that improvements and an increase in children’s play spaces are required in the area, but these must be accessible to the public to ensure any further loss of public open space through the Borough. It is unclear why the existing facilities adjacent to the community centre are not utilised or appropriate under supervision.

The applicant has provided additional supporting information to

clarify why the enclosed play area is required. Little Munchkins offers ‘Free Flow’ education. This means that children should have the opportunity to access outdoor areas in a safe environment. The existing equipped play space would not meet these requirements as it is not attached to the building and is open to use by all members of the public and therefore would not be considered secure. The applicant has stated that Little Munchkins has lost children to other nurseries who are able to offer free access to an outdoor play area. The applicant is concerned that the community centre may not be a suitable premises for the nursery if a safe outdoor play area can not be provided. A supporting letter has been received from the Early Education and Childcare Unit of Hampshire County Council. The letter states that current government guidance strongly promotes the use of outdoor play areas. The Early Years Foundation Stage is a framework which will become statutory in September 2008 and covers the care of children from birth to 5 years of age. The document states that all early years providers must have access to an outdoor area. OFSTED inspections will take this into account and the chances of achieving a good outcome are reduced by the lack of an outdoor play area.

Officers have given careful consideration to this application. The

proposal would result in the loss of a small area of public open space but officers do not consider that this would detract from the use and enjoyment of the wider area. Policy R3 states that redevelopment of a small area of public open space may be acceptable to provide an appropriate recreation or community use. The provision of a high standard of nursery care is an important community facility within the borough. Little Munchkins is aiming to improve the quality of the service they provide to the local community through the provision of an outdoor play area. Any future applications which would result in the further loss of public open space would be judged on their own merits and it is not considered that this application would set a precedent. Therefore on balance officers consider that the proposal is acceptable.

14 38 P/07/0593/FP – 41 FAIRFIELD AVENUE, FAREHAM

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-79-

Director of Regulatory Services – No objection subject to conditions

16 39 P/07/0627/FP - PALMERSTON DRIVE FAREHAM This application has been withdrawn from this agenda.

17 44 P/07/0541/FP – 134 BLACKBROOK ROAD, FAREHAM The schedule of activities suggested by the applicant includes;

Scouting and Guiding activities

Pre-School Nursery

Dog Training

Lettings to the Council for community uses ie. polling station, issue of bus passes

Children’s parties (up to the age of 11 years)

Computer gaming club

Coffee mornings

Exercise classes

This schedule would be subject to a condition permitting only these uses unless otherwise first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

19 49 P/07/0532/FP – SWORDFISH CLOSE – FLATS 6 AND 7

For point of clarification the balustrades project 0.55 metres out from the French doors with a platform.

20 51 P/07/0635/FP – 22 CROFTON LANE, HILL HEAD

Director of Regulatory Services – No objection One letter has been received raising the following concerns; All trees towards the rear of the property should have Tree

Preservation Orders;

A condition should be attached to prevent the joining of 22 and 20 Crofton Lane;

No commercial activity should occur at No.20;

The height of both properties should not be increased.

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-80-

ZONE 3 – 5:00

21 53 P/07/0643/FP – 79 SHANNON ROAD, STUBBINGTON An additional email and a additional letter of objection have been

received, raising the following concerns:

Fail to understand why the fencing has been erected as the access is still open, unless the applicants plan to build a gate sometime in the future;

The houses here were built in 1983 to an open plan design;

The new fencing is stark, anti-social and is out of keeping with the area. It sets a bad precedent to other householders which would completely change the boundary lines, spoiling the ambiance of this area;

The fencing impairs the line of sight when turning from Shannon Road into Finisterre Close and visa versa, particularly for people on bicycles (e.g. school children). It presents a health and safety risk to children and pensioners.

24 58 P/07/0538/FP – WHITE HART LANE – NEVILLE AVENUE This application has been formally withdrawn by the applicant, pending a new application to address the recommended reasons for refusal.

27 63 P/07/0616/FP – CAMS HALL SCHOOL, SHEARWATER AVENUE Satisfactory amended plan received widening access drive to 6

metres Director of Regulatory Services – No objection 29 66 P/07/0552/FP – FOCUS DIY STORE – RESTAURANT

This application has been withdrawn from the agenda

dc-070613-r04-lsm

-81-

ITEM 8 PLANNING ADVICE NOTE ON THE DESIGN OF SMOKING

SHELTERS Planning advice on the design of smoking shelters.

Delete first bullet point on page 3 Add additional bullet point on page 4

Where alcohol is to be offered for sale or consumed, the area may also need to be covered by a Premises Licence issued by the Council under the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003.

Under pre-application advice on page 5 add Further advice and guidance on the Smoke Free Legislation can also be obtained from the Council’s food, health and safety licensing team or be contacting regulatory@fareham.gov.uk.