Agenda and minutes

The Committee observed a minute’s silence in memory of Councillor Geraint Thomas who had sadly and suddenly passed away.

In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, Councillors of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to declare interests where appropriate.

The following disclosures of interests were made:

The Planning Code of Conduct requires Councillors who have been lobbied, received correspondence or been approached by an interested party with respect to any planning matter should declare this at the meeting which discusses the matter. Councillors should declare if they have been lobbied at this point in the agenda.

The following lobbying declarations were made by Councillors:- 

All Councillors in attendance had been lobbied regarding application CR/2019/0542/FUL.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 18 November 2019.

The minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 18 November 2019 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair, subject to the following amendment to minute 9 that it be noted that as Councillor P C Smith had already declared an interest in this item he left the room and took no further part in the discussion on this item.

To consider report PES/327a of the Head of Economy and Planning.

RECOMMENDATION to PERMIT

The Committee considered report PES/327a of the Head of Economy and Planning which proposed as follows:

Demolition Of Existing Nightclub And Redevelopment Of Site Providing 152 Apartments, Ground Floor Commercial/Retail Space (Class A1, A3, A4, B1 And/Or D2 Uses) Split Between 2 TO 4 Units, New Publicly Accessible Public Realm (Including Pocket Park), New Publicly Accessible Electric Vehicle Charging Hub, Car Club And Associated Works

The Principal Planning Officer provided a verbal summation of the application and updated the Committee that further comments had been received from Environmental Health on the proposed development. The additional comments state that the proposed development would be exposed to road noise, rail noise and, potentially, plant noise. The applicant had undertaken further work on these issues, but the Environmental Health Officer did not consider that all noise and ventilation issues have been resolved. The Environmental Health Officer stated that in some areas, noise levels would exceed the Council’s standards and that further acoustic design measures and mitigation were consequently required. Concerns were also raised about potential overheating within the proposed flats and the need for natural ventilation and openable windows. Environmental Health therefore required further details to address noise and overheating, which the Officer felt could be addressed by condition. Additional conditions on other noise issues were also recommended.

The Committee was informed that there were ongoing discussions concerning the façade treatment at ground and first floors of the proposed building around the proposed pocket park and it was recommended that this could be delegated to officers to resolve.  In updating the Committee further, the Principal Planning Officer clarified the matters regarding the establishment of the car club (which included some free membership for residents and a review mechanism as it progressed), together with the electric vehicle charging point installation.  It was noted that the implementation and maintenance of the hard and soft landscaping would now be covered by a Section 106 Agreement in order to flexibly deal with integration of the public realm and highway improvements of both the Moka and Station Gateway Improvement scheme.

It was recognised that the proposal would involve the loss of the existing nightclub.  However, with the main focus of nightlife activity tending to relocate to the High Street it was felt that there was sufficient alternative provision available.  It was recognised that the proposed flats all complied with the minimum Nationally Described Space Standards, and that all flats would benefit from either a 5 sqm balcony or Juliet balcony, with some units having additional windows resulting in dual aspect. There was acknowledgement that the proposed building would result in a loss of four protected trees which was regrettable.  However, infrastructure contributions would assist in tree mitigation to ensure replanting and could be secured by a Section 106 Agreement.  With reference to the affordable housing contributions, it was noted that the provision of the fifteen affordable housing units would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement and that there would also be a two stage review of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.